Legal Opinion

Leidman v. Bingham

New York Court of Appeals

Decided December 3, 1953PublishedCited by 1 opinion

1Per curiam

It is undisputed that petitioner failed to sign “under protest” the payrolls as well as the checks issued thereon for the period in question. Accordingly, section 93c-2.0 of the Administrative Code of the City of New York prevents his recovery on any further claim for wages and salary during the period of his active military duty. Neither the State Soldiers ’ and Sailors ’ Civil Relief Act (Military Law, § 305) nor its Federal counterpart (U. S. Code, tit. 50, Appendix, § 522) relieved petitioner of the necessity of signing under protest as prescribed by section 93c-2.0 of the Administrative…

2Cases cited2 opinions

  1. Pisciotta v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1950
  2. Pisciotta v. City of New YorkNew York Court of Appeals · 1950

3Cited by1 opinion

  1. Parsons v. Department of TransportationNew York Supreme Court · 1973

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

Powered by the Exa API