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)

WILLIAM C. DODGE, Respondent, v. CITY OF NEW YORK, Appellant.

Per Curiam.

In the submission of controversy the parties stipulated that "plaintiff did not write upon his payroll receipts for the period from January 1, 1934 to June 30, 1937 that the amount received by him was received under protest." Under the provisions of section 149 of the Charter of the City of New York (Laws 1901, ch. 466, as amd.) there can be no recovery upon any further claim for salary. (See opinion in Quayle v. City of New York, 278 N.Y. 19, decided herewith.) We do not pass upon any other question.

The judgment should be reversed and the complaint dismissed, without costs. (See 278 N.Y. 599.)

CRANE, Ch. J., LEHMAN, O'BRIEN, HUBBS, LOUGHRAN, FINCH and RIPPEY, JJ., concur.

Judgment reversed, etc.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

DODGE v. CITY OF NEW YORK
(Apr 13, 1938)