From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pruzan v. Board of Education of City of New York

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 18, 1961
176 N.E.2d 96 (N.Y. 1961)

Summary

In Pruzan v. Board of Educ. (9 N.Y.2d 911 [1961]) the constitutionality of Condon-Wadlin was at least impliedly asserted.

Summary of this case from City of New York v. De Lury

Opinion

Argued April 27, 1961

Decided May 18, 1961

Appeal from the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the First Judicial Department, JACOB MARKOWITZ, J.

Harold G. Israelson, Arnold R. Streit and Mark K. Benenson for appellants. Charles H. Tenney, Corporation Counsel ( Leo A. Larkin, Sidney P. Nadel and Pauline K. Berger of counsel), for respondent.


Judgment affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: Chief Judge DESMOND and Judges DYE, FULD, FROESSEL, VAN VOORHIS, BURKE and FOSTER.


Summaries of

Pruzan v. Board of Education of City of New York

Court of Appeals of the State of New York
May 18, 1961
176 N.E.2d 96 (N.Y. 1961)

In Pruzan v. Board of Educ. (9 N.Y.2d 911 [1961]) the constitutionality of Condon-Wadlin was at least impliedly asserted.

Summary of this case from City of New York v. De Lury
Case details for

Pruzan v. Board of Education of City of New York

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL PRUZAN et al., Being the Officers and Executive Board of the…

Court:Court of Appeals of the State of New York

Date published: May 18, 1961

Citations

176 N.E.2d 96 (N.Y. 1961)
176 N.E.2d 96
217 N.Y.S.2d 86

Citing Cases

City of New York v. De Lury

The courts which have dealt with the constitutional question under discussion have concluded that no…

Matter of Zeluck v. Bd. of Educ

Similarly, section 210 Civ. Serv. of the Civil Service Law cannot be said to infringe upon the petitioners'…