Case Name: PEOPLE ex rel. O'CONNOR v. BRADY, Commissioner of Buildings
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1901-06-07
Citations: 70 N.Y.S. 823
Docket Number: 
Parties: PEOPLE ex rel. O’CONNOR v. BRADY, Commissioner of Buildings.
Judges: 
Reporter: West's New York Supplement
Volume: 70
Pages: 823–824

Head Matter:
PEOPLE ex rel. O’CONNOR v. BRADY, Commissioner of Buildings.
(Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department.
June 7, 1901.)
Municipal Civil Service—Inspector of Buildings—Veteran of Civil War —Removal—Sufficient Hearing.
Where relator, who was a veteran of the war of the Rebellion, was removed from his position as inspector of buildings after a full hearing, in which his failure to make proper entries in his journal and his making a false report were proven by his own books and admissions, such removal was proper.
Certiorari by the people, on the relation of Cornelius O’Connor, against Thomas J. Brady, commissioner of public buildings of the city of New York.
Writ dismissed.
Argued before HATCH, McLAUGHLIN, PATTERSON, INGRAHAM, and LAUGHIIN, JJ.
Louis J. Grant, for relator.
John D. Quincy, for respondent.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The relator was dismissed from his position in the department of buildings of the city of New York after a hearing upon charges made against him by the commissioner, such charges being absence without leave, violation of the rules and regulations governing the employés of the department, making a false report, failure to make proper entries in his journal, and neglect of duty. He was a veteran of the war of the Rebellion, and it is claimed that he was not accorded a hearing such as he was entitled to under the laws of the state of Hew York. The relator in this case was entitled to a hearing upon charges, and upon due notice, and an opportunity to explain. He was given a full hearing. Every right he had under the statute was accorded him, and his guilt respecting some of the charges, namely, his failure to make proper entries in his journal, and his making of a false report, was established by his own hooks and his own admission. The action of the respondent was right, and the writ should be dismissed, with costs.