From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Matter of Nerling v. Walsh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 1, 1935
245 App. Div. 796 (N.Y. App. Div. 1935)

Opinion

June, 1935.

Present — Hill, P.J., Rhodes, McNamee, Crapser and Heffernan, JJ.


Relator, on January 1, 1932, was appointed by a former sheriff of Schenectady county to the position of cook in his office. He was appointed without reference to any civil service list. The relator was sworn in as a deputy sheriff. As a deputy sheriff he performed the usual duties incident to that office. The present sheriff of Schenectady county upon assuming office, on January 1, 1935, without notice and without preferring charges against him, removed relator and appointed another in his place. Relator is a World war veteran and seeks reinstatement under the provisions of section 22 Civ. Serv. of the Civil Service Law. Relator is the personal appointee of the sheriff who named him and is not protected by the Civil Service Law and the sheriff's power to remove him is unrestricted. ( Matter of Griffenhagen v. Ordway, 218 N.Y. 451; Matter of Flaherty v. Milliken, 193 id. 564.) Section 22 Civ. Serv. of the Civil Service Law expressly provides that nothing therein shall apply to the position of deputy of any official or department. Order unanimously affirmed, with costs.


Summaries of

Matter of Nerling v. Walsh

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, Third Department
Jun 1, 1935
245 App. Div. 796 (N.Y. App. Div. 1935)
Case details for

Matter of Nerling v. Walsh

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of the Application of LEONARD L. NERLING, Appellant, for an…

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

Date published: Jun 1, 1935

Citations

245 App. Div. 796 (N.Y. App. Div. 1935)

Citing Cases

De Iorio v. County of Suffolk

More recently, the Flaherty case was cited in Enstrom v. City of New York ( 258 App. Div. 672, 676) wherein…

Amico v. Erie Co. Legis

(See 1915 Opns. Atty. Gen. [vol. 2] 418, 441.) The holding in Flaherty was reconsidered and reaffirmed by the…