Prowler v. City of New York

216 A.D. 824
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided May 15, 1926·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinion

Per Curiam:

The compensation to be paid to the plaintiff for the period of t'me while he was out of employment should be reduced to the sum of $2,080.85, being the amount of full pay, less the amount earned by the plaintiff during his absence from actual duty in the department (Gutheil v. City of N. Y., 119 App. Div. 20; Sutliffe v. City of N. Y., 132 id. 831.) The judgment appealed from is, therefore, modified by reducing the judgment as entered, including costs, to the sum of $2,172.10, and as so modified affirmed, without costs. Judgment modified [825] by reducing the amount of the judgment as entered to the sum of $2,172.10, and as so modified affirmed, without costs. Present — Clarke, P. J., Dowling, Finch, MeAvoy and Wagner, JJ.

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

Prowler v. City of New York, 216 A.D. 824 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1926).

216 A.D. 824 (Prowler v. City of New York) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Sinicropi v. Bennett
92 A.D.2d 309 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1983)
Spurck v. Civil Service Board
42 N.W.2d 720 (Supreme Court of Minnesota, 1950)
White v. Harrell
239 A.D. 604 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1934)