Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Merlino v. Schneider

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

Decided August 24, 1998Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Thompson, J.,

concurs in part and dissents in part and votes to dismiss the appeal from the decision and to affirm the judgment with the following memorandum: I disagree with my colleagues and conclude that the judgment should be affirmed. Courts may intervene to ensure that tests are fairly administered and that promotions are awarded according to merit and fitness (see, NY Const, art V § 6; Matter of Weitzenberg v Nassau County Civ. Serv. Commn., 172 AD2d 613, 614). However, once it is determined that the standards employed were fair and reasonable, the Court’s involvement ends (see, Matter…

2Cases cited7 opinions

  1. Matter of Fink v. FineganNew York Court of Appeals · 1936
  2. Sloat v. Board of Examiners of the Board of EducationNew York Court of Appeals · 1937
  3. Pearl v. New York State Department of Civil ServiceNew York Supreme Court · 1957
  4. Oback v. NadelNew York Court of Appeals · 1982
  5. in Matter of Ira Weitzenberg v. Nassau County Civil Service CommissionAppellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York · 1991

2 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