Wilmerding v. O'Dwyer
| Decision Date | 13 November 1947 |
| Citation | 297 N.Y. 664,76 N.E.2d 325 |
| Parties | Lucis WILMERDING, Appellant, v. William O'DWYER, Mayor et al., Respondents. |
| Court | New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Appeal from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First Department, 272 App.Div. 35, 69 N.Y.S.2d 90.
Action by Lucius Wilmerding against William O'Dwyer, as mayor of the City of New York, and others, to enjoin issuance and sale of budget notes to meet a deficiency arising from operation of a municipally owned subway system, in which Robert Kirkpatrick and others intervened as defendants. The plaintiff was a taxpayer. On plaintiff's motion for an injunction, pendente lite, it was stipulated that the application might be treated as a motion for summary judgment by all parties. The motion for a temporary injunction was denied and the complaint dismissed on motion by defendant for summary judgment in their favor pursuant to the stipulation.
In January 1946, the subway employees submitted a demand for a general increase in wages. After a conference with representatives of a large number of such employees, the mayor appointed a committee known as the mayor's advisory transit committee to investigate and report on the matter of wages and labor relations. There were extended hearings and discussion with the subway employees or their representatives. The advisory committee made its report and recommendations for a general wage increase and changes in increments to become effective as of July 1, 1946, involving the expenditure of more than $17,000,000 annually. The report was referred to the Board of Transportation which is the agency for the management, operation and maintenance of the transit facilities of New York City.
The current annual budget of the City of New York for the fiscal year commencing July 1, 1946 had already been adopted prior or to the submission of the report of the advisory committee and approval of the Board of Transportation. That required that the City raise the necessary moneys by interim financing prior to the adoption of its budget for the next fiscal year. The Board of Estimate adopted a resolution authorizing the issuance and sale of budget notes to provide the $18,500,000 of required funds. The resolution provided that, pursuant to subdivision 2 of paragraph c of Section 29.00 of the Local Finance Law, Consol.Laws, c. 33-a, the comptroller be authorized to issue and sell budget notes of the City of New York in an amount not exceeding $18,500,000 to mature in the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Black River Regulating Dist. v. Adirondack League Club, 307 N.Y. 475
..."with directions to dismiss the petitions solely upon the ground that the issues are moot". We thus did not reach the merits ( Wilmerding v. O'Dwyer, 297 N.Y. 664) nor did we deem it a situation requiring special treatment ( Matter of Rosenbluth v. Finkelstein, 300 N.Y. 402; Matter of Glenr......
-
Ruskin v. Safir
...of the court's reasons (see, e.g., Matter of Park E. Corp. v. Whalen, 43 N.Y.2d 735, 401 N.Y.S.2d 791, 372 N.E.2d 578; Wilmerding v. O'Dwyer, 297 N.Y. 664, 76 N.E.2d 325; see also, Karger, Powers of the New York Court of Appeals, § 71(a), at 435 [3d ed.] ["there seems to be no uniform patte......
-
Finkelstein v. New York State Bd. of Law Examiners
...become moot (see, Adirondack League Club v. Board of Black River Regulating Dist., 301 N.Y. 219, 223, 93 N.E.2d 647; Wilmerding v. O'Dwyer, 297 N.Y. 664, 665, 76 N.E.2d 325; see also, Matter of Gold-Greenberger v. Human Resources Admin. of City of N.Y., 77 N.Y.2d 973, 974, 571 N.Y.S.2d 897,......
-
Salzman v. Impellitteri
...v. Maltbie, 186 Misc. 494, affd. 271 App. Div. 81, affd. 296 N.Y. 893; Wilmerding v. O'Dwyer, 272 App. Div. 35, revd. on other grounds, 297 N.Y. 664; Matter of Colbert v. Delaney, 249 App. Div. 209, affd. 273 N.Y. If the view were taken that the Legislature had lost the right after 1938 to ......