City of Toledo v. Klaiber

Ohio Court of Appeals

City of Toledo v. Klaiber

187 N.E. 746, 46 Ohio App. 166, 15 Ohio Law. Abs. 516, 1933 Ohio App. LEXIS 412

DecidedJune 19, 1933

StatusPublished

This text of 187 N.E. 746 (City of Toledo v. Klaiber) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Ohio Court of Appeals primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

City of Toledo v. Klaiber, 187 N.E. 746, 46 Ohio App. 166, 15 Ohio Law. Abs. 516, 1933 Ohio App. LEXIS 412 (Ohio Ct. App. 1933).

Pincite

Opinion

OPINION

By THE COURT

The evidence in the instant case shows that Klaiber appeared before the safety director, and testimony was taken on the charges thus preferred against him, the hearings thereon continuing intermittently from July 7, 1932, to and including September 9, 1932. At the conclusion thereof, on September 10, 1932, Klaiber was dismissed from the department. From this order of dismissal Klaiber filed his appeal with the civil service commission. After hearing the evidence there adduced, the commission-affirmed the action of the director of public safety. An appeal was attempted to be taken to the Court of Common Pleas, but was abandoned, the action so taken having been dismissed. Klaiber claims, among other things, that the charges were never given to him personally, but the evidence clearly shows that at the very beginning of the hearings, and during their continuance, he had full knowledge thereof, and that at the trial before the civil service commission they were read to him.

We cannot say that- there was no evidence justifying the finding of the director of public safety and the consequent order of dismissal. The proceedings had were authorized by the charter of the city of Toledo and by the rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto. As we view it, an action in mandamus will not lie to vacate the order thus made. Judgment of the Court of Common Pleas is therefore reversed, and the cause is remanded to that court, with directions to dismiss the petition at the costs of the relator.

Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.

RICHARDS, WILLIAMS and LLOYD, JJ, concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

OPINION

By THE COURT

The evidence in the instant case shows that Klaiber appeared before the safety director, and testimony was taken on the charges thus preferred against him, the hearings thereon continuing intermittently from July 7, 1932, to and including September 9, 1932. At the conclusion thereof, on September 10, 1932, Klaiber was dismissed from the department. From this order of dismissal Klaiber filed his appeal with the civil service commission. After hearing the evidence there adduced, the commission-affirmed the action of the director of public safety. An appeal was attempted to be taken to the Court of Common Pleas, but was abandoned, the action so taken having been dismissed. Klaiber claims, among other things, that the charges were never given to him personally, but the evidence clearly shows that at the very beginning of the hearings, and during their continuance, he had full knowledge thereof, and that at the trial before the civil service commission they were read to him.

We cannot say that- there was no evidence justifying the finding of the director of public safety and the consequent order of dismissal. The proceedings had were authorized by the charter of the city of Toledo and by the rules and regulations adopted pursuant thereto. As we view it, an action in mandamus will not lie to vacate the order thus made. Judgment of the Court of Common Pleas is therefore reversed, and the cause is remanded to that court, with directions to dismiss the petition at the costs of the relator.

Judgment reversed, and cause remanded.

RICHARDS, WILLIAMS and LLOYD, JJ, concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

187 N.E. 746, 46 Ohio App. 166, 15 Ohio Law. Abs. 516, 1933 Ohio App. LEXIS 412, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/city-of-toledo-v-klaiber-ohioctapp-1933.