Powers v. City of Asheville

164 S.E. 324, 203 N.C. 2, 1932 N.C. LEXIS 293

• Court: Supreme Court of North Carolina
• Decided: June 15, 1932
• Status: Published

Opinion

Stacy., C. J.

The action of the city authorities in effecting such economies as they deemed necessary, and in the manner selected, is fully warranted by chapter 125, Private Laws 1931, if not by chapter 121. 5 R. C. L., 614.

But the plaintiff contends that in reducing the number of employees in “the classified service,”' seniority ought to be observed, and, in the absence of charges preferred, those longest in the service should be retained over their juniors. Notes, 1 Ann. Gas., 292; Ann. Cas. 1913B, 1012.

This practice may prevail under other statutes (5 R. C. L., 614) and in the Federal Civil Service (U. S. v. Wickersham, 201 U. S., 394), but we find no provision in the charter of the city of Asheville which entitles the plaintiff, as a matter of right, to require the defendants to observe the rule of seniority in effecting economies or reducing forces as authorized by chapter 125, supra.

Without undertaking a minute analysis of the statutory provisions pertinent to the case, it is sufficient to say that the application for writ of mandamus was properly denied for want of a clear showing on the part of the plaintiff to demand it. Braddy v. Winston-Salem, 201 N. C., 301, 159 S. E., 310; Hayes v. Benton, 193 N. C., 379, 137 S. E., 169. Mandamus lies only to enforce a clear legal right. Barham v. Sawyer, 201 N. C., 498; Cody v. Barrett, 200 N. C., 43, 156 S. E., 146; Umstead v. Board of Elections, 192 N. C., 139, 134 S. E., 409; Person v. Doughton, 186 N. C., 723, 120 S. E., 481.

Affirmed.