From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Needleman v. Voorhis

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Oct 7, 1930
254 N.Y. 339 (N.Y. 1930)

Opinion

Argued September 30, 1930

Decided October 7, 1930

Appeal from the Supreme Court, County of Kings.

George E. Polhemus, C. Gordon Lamude and Israel A. Needleman for appellant.

Arthur J.W. Hilly, Corporation Counsel ( William E.C. Mayer and J. Joseph Lilly of counsel), for respondents.


A borough president is an elective officer and a member of the board of aldermen (Greater New York Charter, § 18). That body is charged under the Constitution (Art. III, § 5) with the duty of dividing the several counties within the city of New York into Assembly districts and its members are constitutional officers ( People ex rel. Deitz v. Hogan, 214 N.Y. 216, 222; Matter of Schwab v. Boyle, 174 App. Div. 442, 445; affd., 219 N.Y. 561). The present incumbent of the office of borough president of the borough of Brooklyn, appointed to fill a vacancy (Greater New York Charter, § 382), is forbidden to hold his office by virtue of such appointment beyond the commencement of the next political year (Const. art. X, § 5). So much of section 382 of the Greater New York Charter as provides that a vacancy in this office shall be filled for the unexpired term of his predecessor is, therefore, unconstitutional.

The judgment should be affirmed.

CARDOZO, Ch. J., POUND, CRANE, LEHMAN, KELLOGG, O'BRIEN and HUBBS, JJ., concur.

Judgment affirmed.


Summaries of

Needleman v. Voorhis

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Oct 7, 1930
254 N.Y. 339 (N.Y. 1930)
Case details for

Needleman v. Voorhis

Case Details

Full title:SAM NEEDLEMAN, Appellant, v. JOHN R. VOORHIS et al., as Members of the…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Oct 7, 1930

Citations

254 N.Y. 339 (N.Y. 1930)
173 N.E. 6

Citing Cases

Matter of McEneny v. McKee

A borough president is an elective officer and a member of the board of aldermen, the local legislative body…

Matter of Bergerman v. Gerosa

Appellants urge that chapter 178 of the Laws of 1934 replaced the 1932 legislation and specifically exempted…