From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Maye v. Lindsay

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 2, 1973
301 N.E.2d 425 (N.Y. 1973)

Summary

In Maye, the court held that the city's program was invalid by restricting eligibility to residents of certain parts of the city and that the program violated the merit and fitness provisions of the Constitution.

Summary of this case from Watts v. McGuire

Opinion

Argued June 4, 1973

Decided July 2, 1973

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, SAMUEL J. SILVERMAN, J.

Murray A. Gordon, Stuart Linnick and Robert A. Kennedy for appellants.

Norman Redlich, Corporation Counsel ( Stanley Buchsbaum and Edmund B. Hennefeld of counsel), for respondents.


Order reversed, without costs, on the opinion at Special Term and the judgment of Supreme Court, New York County, reinstated.

Concur: Judges BURKE, BREITEL, JASEN, GABRIELLI and JONES. Chief Judge FULD and Judge WACHTLER dissent and vote to affirm on the opinion at the Appellate Division.


Summaries of

Maye v. Lindsay

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
Jul 2, 1973
301 N.E.2d 425 (N.Y. 1973)

In Maye, the court held that the city's program was invalid by restricting eligibility to residents of certain parts of the city and that the program violated the merit and fitness provisions of the Constitution.

Summary of this case from Watts v. McGuire
Case details for

Maye v. Lindsay

Case Details

Full title:In the Matter of MICHAEL J. MAYE, Individually and as President of…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: Jul 2, 1973

Citations

301 N.E.2d 425 (N.Y. 1973)
301 N.E.2d 425
347 N.Y.S.2d 439

Citing Cases

Brennan v. Housing Auth

Plaintiffs then commenced these proceedings which are amply elucidated in the dissenting opinion. As noted by…

Watts v. McGuire

Subdivision 2 of section 3 Pub. Off. of the Public Officers Law which is applicable here, prohibits a…