Danziger v. Rice
Opinion of the Court
The objection that, because only two candidates passed the examination, no eligible list exists from which appointment could be made cannot be sustained. Section 3 of rule VIII of the Rules of the Classified Civil Service of the Civil Service Commission of the State of New York provides that if the eligible list certified contains less than three names the appointing officer in his discretion may make a selection for appointment from such list, or proceed as provided in section 4 or section 10 of the same rule, “ subject, however, to the provisions of the Constitution giving preference in appointment to veterans.” (See Const, art. V, § 6.)
Section 10 of said rule, here applicable, provides that whenever a vacancy exists in a position of the competitive class and an open competitive examination does not result in an eligible list of at least three names, the appointing officer may nominate a person to the Commission for non-competitive examination and if such nominee be certified by the Commission as qualified he may be appointed to fill such vacancy. This authority to nominate is, of course, subject to the exception contained in section 3 above quoted “ giving preference in appointment to veterans.” Section 8 of the Civil Service Law makes the foregoing rules applicable to officers of the city. Here the petitioner is a disabled veteran. If the vacancy, therefore, is to be filled, the petitioner is entitled to the appointment.
The order should be modified by granting an alternative order of mandamus, and as so modified affirmed, without costs.
Present—Martin, P. J., Merrell, McAvoy, O’Malley and Untermyer, JJ.
Order modified by granting an alternative order of mandamus, and as so modified affirmed, without costs. Settle order on notice.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.