Case ID: ny_245/html/0604-01.html
Source: Caselaw Access Project
Author: {"author": "", "license": "Public Domain", "url": "https://static.case.law/"}
Date Created: 2024-08-24T03:29:51.129683

Joseph Haag, Appellant, v. The City of New York, Respondent.
    (Argued May 31, 1927;
    decided June 14, 1927.)
    
      Civil service - — municipal corporations — New Yorit city — retirement on reaching age of seventy not a bar to reappointment to city office.
    
    
      Haag v. City of New York, 220 App. Div. 704, affirmed.
    Appeal, by permission, from so much of an order of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court in the first judicial department, entered May 13, 1927, as affirmed an order of Special Term denying a motion by plaintiff to strike out the first defense contained in the answer. The action was to recover salary as assistant to the mayor of the city of New York. The defense was that plaintiff had been retired upon reaching the age of seventy years, pursuant to section 1710 of the charter of the city of New York and was ineligible to appointment to public office.
    The following question was certified:
    “ Is the first defense contained in the answer herein sufficient in law upon the face thereof? ”
    
      Isaac H. Levy and George Gordon Battle for appellant.
    
      George P. Nicholson, Corporation Counsel (Willard S. Allen, William E. C. Mayer and J. Joseph Lilly of counsel), for respondent.
   Order affirmed, with costs; question certified answered in the affirmative; no opinion.

Concur: Cardozo, Ch. J., Pound, Crane, Andrews and Kellogg, JJ. Not sitting: O’Brien, J. Absent: Lehman, J.