Legal Opinion

Matter of Bridgman v. Kern

New York Court of Appeals

Decided March 12, 1940PublishedCited by 18 opinions

1Per curiam

We are of opinion that the technical oral examination was invalid for these reasons: (1) The direction that the “ examiners should fail not less than about one-half the total group of candidates ” was improper; (2) the instruction that the examiners adjust their ratings after consultation violated the civil service rule that “ Each subject shall be rated by two examiners acting separately ” (Rules of Municipal Civil Service Commission [New York City], rule 5, § 5, ¶ 1); (3) commentaries elicited from candidates were so vague or remote in character and broad in scope that the ratings in…

2Cases cited1 opinion

  1. Sloat v. Board of Examiners of the Board of EducationNew York Court of Appeals · 1937

3Cited by18 opinions

  1. State Ex Rel. Paynter v. Marion Cty. Sup. Ct., Rm. No. 5Indiana Supreme Court · 1976
  2. Resnick v. Civil Service CommissionSupreme Court of Connecticut · 1968
  3. State Ex Rel. Kos v. AdamsonSupreme Court of Minnesota · 1948
  4. Dowling v. BrennanAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1954
  5. Civil Service Commission v. FrazziniSupreme Court of Colorado · 1955

13 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API