Case ID: ny_226/html/0636-02.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

In the Matter of the Application of William A. Prendergast, as Comptroller of the City of New York, Appellant, for a Writ of Mandamus against John P. Cohalan et al., as Surrogates of the County of New York, Respondents.
    
      Matter of Prendergast v. Cohalan, 179 App. Div. 883, affirmed.
    (Argued April 9, 1919;
    decided April 29, 1919.)
    Appeal, by permission, from an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered June 29, 1917, which affirmed an order of Special Term denying a motion for a writ of mandamus to compel the defendants to cause to be maintained in the office of said surrogates daily time reports of each employee in said office, except such heads of divisions or bureaus therein as may be excused by said surrogates from the duty of making such reports; monthly service records of each of said employees required to make daily time reports; and cause to be compiled in said office and furnished once a month to the comptroller of the city of New York monthly statements and reports showing functional and unit costs of the work of the office of the surrogates of New York county, said reports, records and statements to be compiled, maintained and furnished in accord with the forms therefor heretofore submitted to the surrogates of New York county on or about March 27, 1916, by said comptroller, but subject to any modification of said forms as may be mutually agreed upon by said surrogates on the one hand and by the said comptroller on the other. The Special Term held that section 149-a of the charter of New York city, which provides for the furnishing of detailed reports as required by the comptroller, was not applicable to the surrogates of New York county, inasmuch as the surrogates were not county but judicial officers of the state and, therefore, both the surrogates and their employees are state officers and employees.
    
      Lamar Hardy, Corporation Counsel {Terence Farley and Elliot S. Benedict'oí counsel), for appellant.
    
      George L. Ingraham, Robert Ludlow Fowler and Arthur T. O’Leary for respondents.
   Order affirmed, with costs; no opinion.

Concur: His cock, Ch. J., Chase, Hogan, Cardozo, Pound, McLaughlin and Andrews, JJ.