Public-domain · open source
OpenJurist

5 N.Y.2d 548

O'Neill v. Schechter

New York Court of Appeals

Decided April 16, 1959

New York Court of Appeals · decided 1959-04-16

Cited by 4 later decisions (1 by the Supreme Court) — most recently March 1987

Good law ✅— No negative treatment on recordhow we know

Decided 1959-04-16

View the full empirical analysis of this case →

Desmond, J. (dissenting).

¶1The four-month time limitation (Civ. Prac. Act, § 1286) ran (as has been held for many years, Matter of Robinson v. McNamara, 275 App. Div. 918; Matter of Lennox v. McNamara, 275 App. Div. 1023) from the official publication of the final answers in the City Record. This proceeding was brought long after that period had expired. The running of the Statute of Limitations could not be affected by any assertion that some petitioners did not have time or did not take time to copy their own answers for their own future reference. The very examination papers here gave express permission to petitioners to copy their own answers and gave notice that the final correct answers would be published in the City Record.

¶2*557I see no question of law or fact here and no basis for any reversal. The order should be affirmed, with costs.

¶3Chief Judge Conway and Judges Fuld and Burke concur with Judge Froessel ; Judge Van Voorhis concurring in the result upon the basis that the four months’ limitation commences to run from the announcement of the grades and relative standings of the applicants for the examination; Judge Desmond dissents in an opinion in which Judge Dye concurs.

¶4Order reversed, etc.

/5/ny2d/548 · .json · Public domain