Case Name: The People of the State of New York ex rel. George W. Meeks, Appellant, v. Michael J. Drummond, as Commissioner of the Department of Charities of the City of New York, and Others, Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1913-05
Citations: 156 A.D. 926
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York ex rel. George W. Meeks, Appellant, v. Michael J. Drummond, as Commissioner of the Department of Charities of the City of New York, and Others, Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 156
Pages: 926–927

Head Matter:
First Department,
May, 1913.
The People of the State of New York ex rel. George W. Meeks, Appellant, v. Michael J. Drummond, as Commissioner of the Department of Charities of the City of New York, and Others, Respondents.
Mandamus — removal .of city employee.
Appeal by relator from an interlocutory judgment of the Supreme Court, entered in the Few York county clerk’s office on the 23d day of January, 1913, and also from an order entered on the 18th day of January, 1913, sustaining a demurrer to an alternative writ of mandamus, with leave to obtain an alternative writ.

Opinion:
Per Curiam:
The commissioner of charities removed the relator after due service of notice , of charges upon him, and after affording him an opportunity for explanation. The charges were substantial. The commissioner found the explanation insufficient. The proceedings taken were in conformity with the provisions of the statute. Under such circumstances the court will .not review, in a mandamus proceeding, the action of the commissioner and determine whether he ought to have been satisfied with the explanation tendered. The demurrer to the alternative writ was' properly sustained, but the order and the interlocutory judgment should not have "granted leaye to obtain a further writ upon the petition as filed. The judgment and order appealed from should, therefore, be mod ified by striking out the leave granted, and as so modified affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Present — Ingraham, P. J., Clarke, Scott, Dowling and Hotchkiss, -JJ. Judgment and order modified as directed in opinion, and as modified affirmed, with ten dollars costs and disbursements. Order to be settled on notice..
See Laws of 1901, chap. 466, § 1543.— [Rep.