From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Iannicelli v. Civil Service Comm

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 21, 1953
281 AD 519 (N.Y. App. Div. 1953)

Opinion


281 A.D. 519 120 N.Y.S.2d 557 In the Matter of FRANK N. IANNICELLI, Respondent, v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NEW YORK et al., Appellants. Supreme Court of New York, First Department. April 21, 1953

         APPEAL from an order of the Supreme Court at Special Term (DICKSTEIN, J.), entered July 1, 1952, as resettled by an order entered August 26, 1952, in New York County, which granted a motion by petitioner for an order pursuant to article 78 of the Civil Practice Act restoring petitioner to active duty as a police officer.

         COUNSEL           Matthew H. Brandenburg for respondent.

          Anthony Curreri of counsel (Seymour B. Quel with him on the brief; Denis M. Hurley, Corporation Counsel, attorney), for appellants.

          Per Curiam.

          The statute imposes as an eligibility requirement for appointment to the position of patrolman in the city of New York that the applicant be less than twenty-nine years of age on the date when his application to take a civil service examination for that position is filed. (Administrative Code of City of New York, § 434a-8.0.) A person who has served in the armed forces is entitled to deduct the period of his military service from his actual age when meeting a maximum age requirement. (Administrative Code of City of New York, § 953-1.1; Military Law, § 246, subd. 10-a.)

          Allowing full credit for military service, petitioner, nevertheless, was over the maximum age limit of twenty-nine years when he filed his application. Under the express terms of the statute he was therefore ineligible for appointment.

          Though the Special Term was doubtless motivated by understandable sympathy for petitioner in rescinding the action of the municipal civil service commission which revoked the certification of petitioner for appointment, there was no power in the court to overlook failure on the part of petitioner to comply with the statutory mandate.

          The order should be reversed and the petition dismissed but without costs.

          DORE, J. P., COHN, CALLAHAN, VAN VOORHIS and BREITEL, JJ., concur.

          Order unanimously reversed and the petition dismissed, without costs.

Summaries of

Matter of Iannicelli v. Civil Service Comm

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
Apr 21, 1953
281 AD 519 (N.Y. App. Div. 1953)
Case details for

Matter of Iannicelli v. Civil Service Comm

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of FRANK N. IANNICELLI, Respondent, against CIVIL SERVICE…

Court:Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department

Date published: Apr 21, 1953

Citations

281 AD 519 (N.Y. App. Div. 1953)
281 App. Div. 519
120 N.Y.S.2d 557

Citing Cases

Walter v. City of New York Police Department

Sometime between April 9 and 11, 1997, the Department decided to apply the age provisions of section 14-109…