People ex rel. O'Dea v. Delaney

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. O'Dea v. Delaney

241 A.D. 844

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided April 15, 1934·Published·Cited by 1 cases

Opinion

Order denying motion for a peremptory mandamus order unanimously affirmed, with costs, as a matter of law and not in the exercise of discretion. We are of opinion that the prior service of the relator, followed by his resignation and a nine-year interval before re-entry into public employment, may not be counted to determine the date of his “ original appointment ” as comprehended by section 31 of the Civil Service Law. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Young, Kapper, Hagarty and Davis, JJ.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Order denying motion for a peremptory mandamus order unanimously affirmed, with costs, as a matter of law and not in the exercise of discretion. We are of opinion that the prior service of the relator, followed by his resignation and a nine-year interval before re-entry into public employment, may not be counted to determine the date of his “ original appointment ” as comprehended by section 31 of the Civil Service Law. Present — Lazansky, P. J., Young, Kapper, Hagarty and Davis, JJ.

People ex rel. O'Dea v. Delaney, 241 A.D. 844 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1934).

Pincite

241 A.D. 844 (People ex rel. O'Dea v. Delaney) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related