Majority
These are cross appeals by petitioners and the Comptroller of the City of New York in a proceeding brought to review a determination as to the prevailing rate of wages of letterers employed by the City of New York. It is a companion case to Matter of Giannettino v. McGoldrick ( 295 N. Y. 208 ), decided herewith, and some of the matters decided there are determinative of points raised herein. Thus, the comptroller here, as in the Giannettino case, made a deduction of 10% in the prevailing rate of wages as determined by him for vacation and pension benefits. That was error and requires the remission of this proceeding to the Appellate Division.
The comptroller cross-appealed from the decision of the Appellate Division that the complaints of Hoof and Hilscher were properly verified. The order appealed from is a nonfinal order "and the appeal must be dismissed.
The comptroller found that labor performed by privately employed letterers came under three categories, viz.: 1. Commercial, 2. Outdoor Advertising, and 3. Theatrical Advertising. He was of the opinion that the work of city-employed letterers fell within the group denominated by the Brotherhood of Painters, Decorators and Paperhangers of America in one of its local unions in New York City as commercial letterers. He pointed out that in outdoor advertising and theatrical work the performance of the labor was confined almost exclusively
It is conceded by the respective parties that if the complaints of Hoof and Hilscher were properly verified the comptroller must make a determination as to prevailing wages for the period from January 1, 1935, to January 1, 1938, by virtue of Labor Law, section 220, subdivision 5-d. Since those complaints were properly verified, such determination must be made.
As to the claims of the petitioners, Blaney, JLipari and Wabshinak, we agree with the Appellate Division that each is entitled to the benefit of the determination for the period commencing with the date of' the filing of his verified complaint. (Campbell v. City of New York, 291 N. Y. 461 , 465-466; Matter of Gaston v. Taylor, 274 N. Y. 359 , 366; Matter of Carr v. Kern, 279 N. Y. 42 , 48; Matter of Simpson v. Taylor, 278 N. Y. 643 .)
Appeal by the Comptroller of the City of New York from so much of the order of the Appellate Division as decided that the complaints of the petitioners Hoof and Hilscher were sufficient in form as verified complaints should be dismissed on the ground that that part of the order does not finally determine a special proceeding within the meaning of the Constitution; and, otherwise, the order should be modified in accordance with this opinion, and as so modified affirmed, without costs.
Lottghran, Ch. J., Lewis, Desmond, Thacher, Dye and Medalie, JJ., concur.
Ordered accordingly.
Cases cited
- In re Levine 287 N. Y. 243 p. 216
- Evans v. Town of Bridgewater 178 Misc. 250 at 264 p. 216
- Rooney v. McGoldrick 280 N. Y. 632 p. 216
- Campbell v. City of New York 291 N. Y. 461 at 465-466 p. 216, p. 218
- Heaney v. McGoldrick 286 N. Y. 38 p. 216
- Watson v. McGoldrick 286 N. Y. 47 p. 216, p. 217
- Carr v. Kern 279 N. Y. 42 at 48 p. 216, p. 218
- Simpson v. Taylor 278 N. Y. 643 p. 216, p. 218
- Gaston v. Taylor 274 N. Y. 359 at 366 p. 216, p. 218
- Mahon v. Board of Education 68 App. Div. 154 at 171 p. 217
- Schieffelin v. Berry 127 Misc. 178 at 217 p. 217
- Schieffelin v. Berry 243 N. Y. 603 p. 217
- Ponsrok v. City of Yonkers 254 N. Y. 91 p. 217
- Kingston v. M. S. Construction Corp. 249 N. Y. 533 p. 217
- Mozarsky v. Whinston Bros. 254 N. Y. 552 p. 217
- Geelan v. St. Patrick's Church of West Neck 179 Misc. 432 p. 217
- Rogers v. Village of Port Chester 234 N. Y. 182 p. 217
- Cotriss v. Village of Medina 206 N. Y. 713 p. 217
- Giannettino v. McGoldrick 295 N. Y. 208 p. 217