Konnoson v. City of New York — 254 A.D. 378

Majority

p. 378

Moses J. Konnoson, Respondent, v. The City of New York, Appellant.

First Department,

June 17, 1938.

p. 379

Oren Clive Herwitz of counsel [Paxton Blair with him on the brief; William C. Ghanler, Corporation Counsel], for the appellant.

Samuel Shapiro, for the respondent.

No competent evidence of a hiring of the plaintiff by any duly authorized person in the office of the corporation counsel was presented. Furthermore, there Was shown no compliance with section 419 of the Greater New York Charter.

Under such circumstances plaintiff is not entitled to recover for any alleged services rendered. (Keane v. City of New York, 88 App. Div. 542 ; Fifth Avenue Bank of New York v. City of New York, 250 id. 844; Lyddy v. Long Island City, 104 N. Y. 218 .)

It follows, therefore, that the order appealed from should be reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and defendant’s motion for summary judgment granted.

Present — Martin, P. J., O’Malley, Townley, Glennon and Untermyer, JJ.

Order unanimously reversed, with twenty dollars costs and disbursements, and motion for summary judgment granted.

Cases cited

Keane v. City of New York 88 App. Div. 542 N.Y. App. Div. 1903-12-11 p. 379
Lyddy v. Long Island City 104 N. Y. 218 N.Y. 1887-01-18 p. 379