New-York tribune. [volume] (New York [N.Y.]) 1866-1924, 1874-10-07
Sits AGAINST THE CITY.
SEVERAL JUDGMENTS IN FAVOR OF THE CONTROL

SEVERAL JUDGMENTS IN FAVOR OF THE CONTROL
IER.
OF the numerous suits against the city with
which the calendars of the various courts are iuc"
bered IL happens frequently that only those when are
decided against the city reach the public Con'rolef
Green's defense is frivolous" IN every case For
instance, OF six decisions handed down on Monday IN
the Superior Court four were In favor OF the city.
In the action of Drake and Byrne against the city the
paintls who in 1869 were in the employ OF the COM
mon Council as clerks brought suit for $500 each WHICH
the Board had voted them as "extra services, OF
Christmas boxes" as such gifts were usually caea'
The plaintiffs demanded payment OF Controller Green,
and upon his refusal to pay Instituted these actions.
The Corporation Counsel defended tnem upon , ,
Employment of the Corporation were forbidden by See
fi0n l6 OF the Charter of 1857. and that the Common
Council had power to give away the money OF the
city as gratuity Judge Robinson sustained the points
and dismissed the complaints.
The plaintiff in the case of Cowan administrator agt
the Mayor brought suit to for wages claimed to
be due for services Pakkeeper at the rate OF per
day during the Sundays of the 1861 1863 anu 1862
which salary had been paid in full for weekday
services. A resolution of the Common Council passed
in 1870, directed the Controller to pay for SUNDAY
services and upon the Controller declining TO pa. IN
accordance herewith this action was brought. Inc
had for services rendered Sunday. and that the
resOlu OF the Common Council was nvalld because
no appropriation made 10 cover the expense con
teinpated thereby and because extra ao wances were
forbidden by the Charter The Court conceded III THESE
views and the complaint was dismissed
The plaintiff in the of Green agt. The Mayor
sought to recover repairs school buildings Upon
the trial it appears that the amount appropriated for
the repairs OF such buildings had been exhausted at the
time when the bills in suit incurred. The Corpora
ton Counsel claimed that the city was not responsive
for debts incurred by the Board OF Education when
that Board existed as separate corporation, ana ina.
no recovery could be had for expenditures incurred IN
excess of the appropriation made for repairs. Upon
these grounds the complaint was dismissed.
The case of Levy agt The Mayor was brought to
recover for stationery furnished to the Boards of Alder
men and Assistant Aldermen upon requistion OF the
clerks OF the respective Boards in the year 1872 to the
amount OF 81 800. To establish the authority OF the
clerks to purchase goods the plaintiff relied upon
resolution adopted in 1870 directing such purchases to
be made by such clerks, aud the Controller 10 pay
therefor the appropriation for City CONTINGENCIES
The Corporation Counsel argued that the Charter re-
qured annual appropriations to be made and that the
resolution Of 1870 applied only to the expenditures Tor
year 1870 His Honor decided that the resolution OF
1870 furnished authority for purchases IN 1872 The
plaintiff thereupOn asked leave TO withdraw Juror ana
the Corporation Counsel assentng the case was apa
doned by the plaintiff