The People of the State of New York ex rel. Charles M. Leet, Relator, v. George L. Heins, as State Architect, Respondent

THIRD DEPARTMENT JUNE, 1908. The People of the State of New York ex rel. Charles M. Leet, Relator, v. George L. Heins, as State Architect, Respondent. Certiorari &emdash; dismissal-of building» inspector by BtateArcliüectaffi/)'med. W' 1 Certiorari issued out of the Su~rcme Couit and attested o~t~ the 8th day of J~iiie, l~9d ir~d1~ed't~ deor~ t teii~ê, a~ ~te ebi dOt,' O'órnif~nditig h1ffi~to certify and, return to the office of the clerk of "the county óf Albany all and' singular his proceedings had' in relation ‘ to' 'the' removal' of'Chailés' lí.' ‘Léef from' his position as building'inspector'."'' ‘ ’........ ..........-y-,-.-.., 1 [MAJORITY — Per Curiam :] Per Curiam : After a fair'friaí'üp’oh'chárges preferred' liy the chief' inspector the State Architect''decided tbafthe, relator,'"a"ve'terari'bf the 'Civil'Waf; was iricbmpbtéht and'guilty o’f misconduct ‘in His 'pbsition'as'huildmg’''iúspectór¡'‘and removed him‘therefrom. ‘‘A careful examination’‘of - the‘evidence "convinces'iis that théré" was competeht proof of tte’facts‘necessary 'to be proved to’'áuthbriiíe the making of the determination,, and.we.aré riot able to say that there‘'was'’su,cli a preponderance of proof"against the'existence of'any 8f 'those Tacts''thatlifthe determination was‘based upon the“verdict'of a 'jiify' ailrmmg'tire 'existence thereof, we would be justified, in setting,it aside as against the weight’of the evidence. That'bemg so', wé'íeel ebmpélíed',' under"section "3140‘'bf'the'Obde’of Crol1; Procedure""- which ‘governs bur 'bearing ‘of " the ‘natter, "tb‘'corifinri’tíie d'eierminatibni"' Determination -unanimously confirmed, with fifty'dollars, hosts and disbúrsemériis tó respondent...... . ...... ' ......... -L"'