Rotach v. Connelie

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York

Rotach v. Connelie

103 A.D.2d 937, 479 N.Y.S.2d 791, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19603

CourtAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York

DecidedJuly 19, 1984

StatusPublished

This text of 103 A.D.2d 937 (Rotach v. Connelie) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Rotach v. Connelie, 103 A.D.2d 937, 479 N.Y.S.2d 791, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19603 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1984).

Pincite

Opinion

— Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court at Special Term (Torraca, J.), entered April 1, 1983 in Albany County, which granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to require respondents to restore petitioner to the eligibility list for the position of New York State trooper and to admit him as a member of the next class of New York State troopers. 11 Upon attaining age 29, petitioner was removed from the eligibility list for the position of New York State trooper. When Special Term, which had been made aware of our decision in Matter of Schatzel v Connelie (91 AD2d 1123), directed that petitioner be restored to the list, this appeal by respondents followed. As there is no meaningful distinction between petitioner’s circumstance and that of the petitioner in the Schatzel case, which has since been reversed (61 NY2d 940), a reversal is required. ¶ Judgment reversed, on the law, without costs, and petition dismissed. Casey, J. P., Weiss, Yesawich, Jr., Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur.

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

— Appeal from a judgment of the Supreme Court at Special Term (Torraca, J.), entered April 1, 1983 in Albany County, which granted petitioner’s application, in a proceeding pursuant to CPLR article 78, to require respondents to restore petitioner to the eligibility list for the position of New York State trooper and to admit him as a member of the next class of New York State troopers. 11 Upon attaining age 29, petitioner was removed from the eligibility list for the position of New York State trooper. When Special Term, which had been made aware of our decision in Matter of Schatzel v Connelie (91 AD2d 1123), directed that petitioner be restored to the list, this appeal by respondents followed. As there is no meaningful distinction between petitioner’s circumstance and that of the petitioner in the Schatzel case, which has since been reversed (61 NY2d 940), a reversal is required. ¶ Judgment reversed, on the law, without costs, and petition dismissed. Casey, J. P., Weiss, Yesawich, Jr., Levine and Harvey, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

103 A.D.2d 937, 479 N.Y.S.2d 791, 1984 N.Y. App. Div. LEXIS 19603, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/rotach-v-connelie-nyappdiv-1984.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack