Summary
In Dodge v. City of New York (278 N.Y. 25), decided at the same time, a similar holding was made, but there, too, apparently no attack was made upon the constitutionality of section 149 of the charter.
Summary of this case from Finn v. City of New YorkOpinion
Argued March 18, 1938
Decided April 13, 1938
Appeal from the Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
William C. Chanler, Corporation Counsel ( Oren Clive Herwitz, Paxton Blair and Robert H. Schaffer of counsel), for appellant.
Matthew G. Saltzman and Abraham Saltzman for respondent.
In the submission of controversy the parties stipulated that "plaintiff did not write upon his payroll receipts for the period from January 1, 1934 to June 30, 1937 that the amount received by him was received under protest." Under the provisions of section 149 of the Charter of the City of New York (Laws 1901, ch. 466, as amd.) there can be no recovery upon any further claim for salary. (See opinion in Quayle v. City of New York, 278 N.Y. 19, decided herewith.) We do not pass upon any other question.
The judgment should be reversed and the complaint dismissed, without costs. (See 278 N.Y. 599.)
CRANE, Ch. J., LEHMAN, O'BRIEN, HUBBS, LOUGHRAN, FINCH and RIPPEY, JJ., concur.
Judgment reversed, etc.