People ex rel. Schoenberg v. Taylor

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

People ex rel. Schoenberg v. Taylor

75 N.Y. St. Rep. 883

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided October 27, 1896·Published

Opinion

BROWN, P. J.

—We are of the opinion that this proceeding cannot be maintained against the appellant, as county treasurer, but that the relator must prosecute his claim against the city of Brooklyn, or the proper officer thereof. The consolidation act (Laws 1895, c. 954, § 3) provides that :

“ All charges and liabilities now "existing against said county or Avhich may hereafter arise or accrue in said city and county, and which, but for this act would be charges against or liabilities of said county, shall, from the date aforesaid (to wit, the 1st day of January, 1896), for the purpose of the enforcement thereof be deemed and taken to be charges against or liabilities of said corporation, the city of Brooklyn, and shall be defrayed or ansAvered unto by it.”

The relator’s claim is for salary for a period subsequent to January 1, 1896, under an employment by the board of supervisors, and falls clearly within the terms of the section quoted. [884]*884It is unnecessary, therefore, to express any opinion upon the merits of the claim.

The order will be reversed, and the motion denied, with $10 costs and disbursements.

All concur.

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

BROWN, P. J.

—We are of the opinion that this proceeding cannot be maintained against the appellant, as county treasurer, but that the relator must prosecute his claim against the city of Brooklyn, or the proper officer thereof. The consolidation act (Laws 1895, c. 954, § 3) provides that :

“ All charges and liabilities now "existing against said county or Avhich may hereafter arise or accrue in said city and county, and which, but for this act would be charges against or liabilities of said county, shall, from the date aforesaid (to wit, the 1st day of January, 1896), for the purpose of the enforcement thereof be deemed and taken to be charges against or liabilities of said corporation, the city of Brooklyn, and shall be defrayed or ansAvered unto by it.”

The relator’s claim is for salary for a period subsequent to January 1, 1896, under an employment by the board of supervisors, and falls clearly within the terms of the section quoted. [884]*884It is unnecessary, therefore, to express any opinion upon the merits of the claim.

The order will be reversed, and the motion denied, with $10 costs and disbursements.

All concur.

People ex rel. Schoenberg v. Taylor, 75 N.Y. St. Rep. 883 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1896).

Pincite

75 N.Y. St. Rep. 883 (People ex rel. Schoenberg v. Taylor) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.