Translate
Text Highlighter

Bookmark

PDF

Share

Report a problem
AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Attorney(S)

In the Matter of the UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM, STATE OF NEW YORK, Appellant. LILLIAN ROBERTS, as Industrial Commissioner, Respondent.

MEMORANDUM.

The order of the Appellate Division should be reversed, without costs, and the charges imposed by the respondent against the experience rating account of the Unified Court System with respect to city marshals should be canceled.

We agree that for the reasons stated in the dissenting memorandum of Justice PAUL J. YESAWICH, JR., at the Appellate Division ( 88 A.D.2d 717, 718), city marshals are independent contractors, not employees. We hold, further, that city marshals are local not State officers (see Public Officers Law, § 2), appointed by the Mayor, not paid by the State, and who, if they could be deemed "employees" of any governmental body, would, under the Unified Court Budget Act (Judiciary Law, § 39, subd 3, par [c]), remain employees of the city, not of the State. For both reasons, therefore, the charges imposed by respondent against the Unified Court System with respect to city marshals must be canceled.

Judges JASEN, JONES, WACHTLER, FUCHSBERG, MEYER and SIMONS concur in memorandum; Chief Judge COOKE taking no part.

Order reversed, etc.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

MATTER OF UNIFIED COURT SYSTEM
(Feb 10, 1983)