From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Zuckerbrod v. Bd. of Higher Educ. of City of N.Y

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 22, 1951
278 App. Div. 822 (N.Y. App. Div. 1951)

Opinion

May 22, 1951.

Present — Peck, P.J., Glennon, Cohn, Callahan and Shientag, JJ.


Order unanimously affirmed, with $20 costs and disbursements to the respondents. We construe the order to mean that this is a direction to pay. The issue presented here is one as to the scope of the judgment and not one as to how it should be enforced. We determine that the decision as to the scope of the judgment is correct and that the plaintiffs are entitled to all of the rights and emoluments as if they had been clerical assistants, and the board of higher education is directed to comply with that judgment. It is not necessary, at this time, to pass upon how it should be enforced, as we assume such question will not arise. Settle order on notice.


Summaries of

Zuckerbrod v. Bd. of Higher Educ. of City of N.Y

Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, First Department
May 22, 1951
278 App. Div. 822 (N.Y. App. Div. 1951)
Case details for

Zuckerbrod v. Bd. of Higher Educ. of City of N.Y

Case Details

Full title:RUTH ZUCKERBROD et al., Respondents, v. BOARD OF HIGHER EDUCATION OF THE…

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

Date published: May 22, 1951

Citations

278 App. Div. 822 (N.Y. App. Div. 1951)

Citing Cases

Driesbach v. City of New York

This contention cannot be sustained. These cost-of-living bonuses were paid to apply on the work for which…