Schoenberg v. Taylor
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York
.Appeal by the defendant, Hubert G. Taylor,, as county treasurer of Kings county, from an older of the Supreme Court, made at the . Kings County Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Kings on the 12th day of June, 1896, directing that a peremptory writ of mandamus issue commanding the defendant . to pay the plaintiff his salary for the months of January, February and March, 1896, under his appointment as. coal inspector by the board of…
Read the full summary
.Appeal by the defendant, Hubert G. Taylor,, as county treasurer of Kings county, from an older of the Supreme Court, made at the . Kings County Special Term and entered in the office of the clerk of the county of Kings on the 12th day of June, 1896, directing that a peremptory writ of mandamus issue commanding the defendant . to pay the plaintiff his salary for the months of January, February and March, 1896, under his appointment as. coal inspector by the board of supervisors of the county of Kings.
1Opinion of the Court
Brown, P. J.:
We are of the opinion that this proceeding' cannot be maintained against the appellant as county treasurer, but that the relator must prosecute his claim against the city of Brooklyn or the proper officer thereof. Tike Consolidation Act (Chap. 954, Laws of 189.5, § 2) provides that: “ All charges and liabilities now existing, against said county, or which may hereafter arise or accrue in said city and county, and which but for this act would be charges against or liabilities of said county, shall, from the date aforesaid (to wit, the 1st day. of January, 1896), for the purpose of…
2Cited by1 opinion
- McGrath v. GroutNew York Supreme Court · 1902