People ex rel. Grady v. Knox

66 N.Y.S. 984
Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of the State of New York·Decided November 9, 1900·Published·Cited by 3 cases

Opinions

INGRAHAM, J.

The relator applied for, and was granted by the court below, a peremptory writ of mandamus requiring the defendants, as commissioners constituting the municipal" civil service commission of the city of New York, to certify upon the pay roll" of the relator that he had been promoted from the position of roundsman to that of a police sergeant on the police force of the city of New York in pursuance of law, and of the rules made in pursuance of law. It appeared by the affidavit upon which this writ was granted that the relator was duly appointed a member of the police force of the department of police of the then city of New York as patrolman on April 14, 1886, and occupied that position until the 22d day of April, 1892, when he was made a detective sergeant; that he continued in the performance of his duty as detective sergeant until July 20, 1895, when he was transferred to the Twenty-Seventh precinct; that on June 7, 1896, he was appointed to the position of roundsman of the said police department, and that on May 8, 1900, the board of police of the city of New York duly promoted the relator from the position of roundsman to that of sergeant because of meritorious and heroic conduct in the performance of his duties as roundsman. This promotion was without a competitive examination, as required by subdivision 4 of section 304 of the charter of the city of New York. The question presented is whether the board of police had the power to promote an officer from a lower to a higher grade in the department without a competitive examination. At the time the relator was appointed to the police force, appointments and promotions were governed by the New York City consolidation act (chapter 410, Laws 1882). By section 271 of that act it was provided that the promotion of officers of the police force should be made by the board of police “only on grounds of meritorious police service and superior capacity.” In 1883 there was passed the original civil service act of the state of New York (chapter 354, Laws 1883). By section 1 of the act provision is made for the appointment of the state civil service commission, and by subdivision 2 of section 2 it is provided that the rules to be established by the commissioners shall provide and declare that “promotions from the lower grade to the higher shall be on the basis of merit and competition.” By chapter 410 of the Laws of 1884 [986]*986section 8 of this act was amended, and provision was made for the-formulation of regulations for the admission of persons into the civil service in each city of the state by the mayor of such city, but the-regulation so to be prescribed must, among other things, provide and declare as is provided in subdivision 2 of section 2 of the act with. reference to the regulation for admission to the civil service of the-state, thus expressly providing that the regulations to be prescribed shall provide for promotion from the lower grade to the higher “on the basis of merit and competition.” The section further provides that “after the termination of three months from the passage of this act no officer or clerk shall be appointed, and no person shall be admitted to or be promoted in either of the said classes now existing, or that may be arranged hereunder pursuant to said rules, until he has. passed the examination, or is shown to be exempted from such examination, in conformity with such regulations.” It further provides : “But the authority by this section conferred shall not be so exercised as to take from any policeman or fireman any right or benefit now conferred by law or by this act, or existing under any lawful regulation of the department in which he serves.” And it is upon this latter clause, which has been continued in force by various enactments, and was finally included in the charter of the Greater Hew York (section 125), that the relator relies. After the passage of this, act, and while its provisions as to the appointment of public officers, within the city of Hew York were in force, this relator was appointed a member of the police force. By that appointment he certainly acquired no right to be promoted in the force, except in accordance-with the provisions of law then in force. By the consolidation act (section 271), before cited, it is provided that “promotions of officers and members of the police force shall be made by the board of police bn grounds of seniority, meritorious police service, and superior capacity”; and by the civil service act of 1884 it was declared that the rules to be formulated regulating the promotion of police officers, should provide that promotions from the lower grade to the higher-should be “on the basis of merit and competition.” Under these provisions it seems clear that each member of the police force thereafter appointed acquired the right to apply for promotion under the provisions of law as it then existed, and had the right, if the result of that competitive examination provided for by this act demonstrated his fitness for the office, to be promoted, and it was the right that the relator acquired upon his appointment to the police force; but it was this right also that was vested in each of the other members of the •force. By chapter 569 of the Laws of 1895, section 265 of the consolidation act was amended, and provision was made for the promotion of officers of the force, and for the appointment of a board by the police commissioners to determine the officers to be promoted. The police commissioners were to make regulations which were to provide for promotion from the lower grades to the- higher, and it was provided that such promotions should be on the basis of seniority, merit, and competition, and that none of the provisions of section 8 of chapter 354 of the Laws of 1883 should apply to the police department. The provisions of section 271 of the consolidation act, which provided [987]*987that promotions of officers and members of the police force should be ■ made by the board only on grounds of meritorious police service and superior capacity, • were amended by providing that no promotion should be made except in the case of a vacancy in the office of chief of police, unless the same was recommended by the chief of po: lice in writing, stating his reasons for such recommendation; and the consolidation act, as thus amended, was in force at the time of the enactment of the charter of the new city of New York (chapter 378, Laws 1897). By that charter the power to make rules and regulations for appointment to and promotion in the police force was taken from the police commissioners, and vested in the city civil service commissioners. By section 288 of the charter it was provided that:

“Promotions of officers and members of the police force shall be made by the police board, as provided in section three hundred and four of this act, on-grounds of seniority, meritorious police service and superior capacity.”

By section 304 it is provided that:

“The' civil service commissioners shall prescribe such regulations for the admission of persons into the police force, and into the service of the police department, as may best promote the efficiency thereof, and ascertain the fitness of candidates in respect to character, knowledge and ability for the police force. The regulations so to be prescribed shall, among other things, be in furtherance of the following provisions: * * * Subd. 4. Promotions from the lower grades to the higher grades shall be on the basis of seniority, of merit and of excellence, as shown by competitive examination. The police board shall transmit to the civil service commission the record of each candidate for promotion.”

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

People ex rel. Grady v. Knox, 66 N.Y.S. 984 (N.Y. Ct. App. 1900).

66 N.Y.S. 984 (People ex rel. Grady v. Knox) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

People ex rel. Leary v. Knox
67 N.Y.S. 1142 (Appellate Division of the Supreme Court of New York, 1900)