Legal Opinion

Dinan v. Patterson

New York Supreme Court

Decided September 23, 1948PublishedCited by 5 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtDickstein, J.

In the budget for 1948-49, adopted by the board of estimate and approved by the city council, a fund of $32,-650,000 was provided (code 9802-019) to cover salary adjustments for city employees, due to the rising cost of living. At the same time, code 9803-019 established a fund to cover adjustments of rates of pay of employees seeking prevailing rate determinations under section 220 of the Labor Law.

In making a schedule of the groups of employees entitled to receive the basic increase of $250 pursuant to code 9802-019, the budget director excluded from consideration such employees who were…

2Cases cited4 opinions

  1. Matter of Gaston v. TaylorNew York Court of Appeals · 1937
  2. Ryan v. . City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1904
  3. Evadan Realty Corp. v. PattersonNew York Supreme Court · 1948
  4. Estes v. City of New YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1946

3Cited by5 opinions

  1. Carroll v. GrumetAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1952
  2. Lang v. Merchants Mutual Casualty Co.New York Supreme Court · 1952
  3. Manning v. JosephNew York Court of Appeals · 1952
  4. Neil v. WagnerNew York Supreme Court · 1960
  5. Kunz v. City of New YorkNew York Supreme Court · 1953

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

Powered by the Exa API