Albert v. Caldwell, No. 16.

CourtUnited States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
Writing for the CourtDONGES, Justice
Citation123 N.J.L. 266,8 A.2d 700
PartiesALBERT et al. v. CALDWELL, Director of Public Safety. CARONIA v. SAME.
Docket NumberNo. 16.
Decision Date16 October 1939
8 A.2d 700
123 N.J.L. 266

ALBERT et al.
v.
CALDWELL, Director of Public Safety.

CARONIA
v.
SAME.

No. 16.

Court of Errors and Appeals of New Jersey.

Oct. 16, 1939.


8 A.2d 700
Syllabus by the Court.

1. Held, under the ordinance creating and governing the police department of the City of Orange, the respondents as chance-men were regular members of the department, assigned to part time duty, and were not temporary employees.

2. Held, the adoption of the Civil Service Act, N.J.S.A. 11:1-1 et seq, by the voters of the municipality did not affect the status of the respondents as regular members of the police department.

CAMPBELL, Chancellor, and HEHER and PERSKIE, Justices, dissenting.

Appeal from Supreme Court.

Certiorari proceedings by James Caronia and by Frank J. Albert, Jr., and others against Maurice H. Caldwell, Director of Public Safety of the City of Orange, to review an order of the defendant dispensing with the services of members of the Chance Force. From a judgment of the Supreme Court setting aside the order, the defendant appeals.

Judgment affirmed.

Edmond J. Dwyer and Joseph F. Zeller, both of Newark, for appellant.

James A. Palmieri and Frank A. Palmieri, both of Orange, for respondent Caronia.

Lord & Lord, of Newark, for respondents Albert et al.

DONGES, Justice.

On September 26, 1938, the Director of Public Safety of the City of Orange issued an order, known as Order No. 35, the pertinent part of which is as follows: "Effective October 1st, 1938, the services of members of the Chance Force, or Chancemen, will be dispensed with." Twenty chancemen were affected by the order. A certiorari to review the order was granted and Mr. Justice Parker set it aside. This appeal is from this action.

There were two writs issued, one at the instance of prosecutor James Caronia, and the other at the instance of prosecutor Frank J. Albert, Jr., and others. No objection is made to the joinder of the prosecutors, although there seems to be no authority for such joinder. See rules 169, 171 of the Supreme Court; Bakely v. Nowrey, 68 N.J.L. 732, 733, 54 A. 833. We proceed to the merits.

The prosecutors-respondents admittedly were all members of the chance force of the Orange Police Department.

Two points are argued by appellant: (1) That prosecutors-respondents are, as a matter of law, not protected by tenure of office, but, on the contrary, are subject to removal without cause and without a hearing; and (2) that the voters of Orange by referendum, on November 2, 1937, adopted the Civil Service...

To continue reading

Request your trial
13 practice notes
  • Martini v. Civil Serv. Comm'n., No. 267.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • March 1, 1943
    ...tenure of office in the police department of a municipality under the Home Rule Act, N.J.S.A. 40:47-1 et seq. (cf. Albert v. Caldwell, 123 N.J.L. 266, 268, 8 A.2d 700), nor to those who as ‘chancemen’ or others seek appointment as policemen. Cf. Albert v. Caldwell, 127 N.J.L. 203, 21 A.2d 7......
  • Caronia v. Civil Service Com'n of N.J., No. A--44
    • United States
    • Superior Court of New Jersey
    • February 3, 1950
    ...of the City of Orange since 1924. As such, he is a member of the regular police department of that municipality. See Caronia v. Caldwell, 123 N.J.L. 266, 8 A.2d 700, 701 (E. & A.1939), wherein it was held that '* * * the chancemen are not temporary employees, but are regular members of the ......
  • Van Ness v. Bor. Of Haledon., No. 8.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • January 29, 1948
    ...under the ordinance here. Marshals are ‘regular’ members of the police department, appointed for part-time service. Albert v. Caldwell, 123 N.J.L. 266, 8 A.2d 700. When an emergency arises or there is sudded need for the exercise of the police officer's powers, he cannot wait for specific a......
  • Perrapato v. Rose, No. A--959
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court – Appellate Division
    • April 9, 1964
    ...relief from an alleged violation of his rights under N.J.S.A. 40:47--6. See Albert v. Caldwell, 123 [199 A.2d 388] N.J.L. 266, 268, 8 A.2d 700 (E. & A. 1939); cf. Martini v. Civil Service Commission, 129 N.J.L. 599, 602, 30 A.2d 569 (Sup.Ct.1943). And see Graham v. City of Asbury Park, 69 N......
  • Request a trial to view additional results
13 cases
  • Martini v. Civil Serv. Comm'n., No. 267.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • March 1, 1943
    ...tenure of office in the police department of a municipality under the Home Rule Act, N.J.S.A. 40:47-1 et seq. (cf. Albert v. Caldwell, 123 N.J.L. 266, 268, 8 A.2d 700), nor to those who as ‘chancemen’ or others seek appointment as policemen. Cf. Albert v. Caldwell, 127 N.J.L. 203, 21 A.2d 7......
  • Caronia v. Civil Service Com'n of N.J., No. A--44
    • United States
    • Superior Court of New Jersey
    • February 3, 1950
    ...of the City of Orange since 1924. As such, he is a member of the regular police department of that municipality. See Caronia v. Caldwell, 123 N.J.L. 266, 8 A.2d 700, 701 (E. & A.1939), wherein it was held that '* * * the chancemen are not temporary employees, but are regular members of the ......
  • Van Ness v. Bor. Of Haledon., No. 8.
    • United States
    • United States State Supreme Court (New Jersey)
    • January 29, 1948
    ...under the ordinance here. Marshals are ‘regular’ members of the police department, appointed for part-time service. Albert v. Caldwell, 123 N.J.L. 266, 8 A.2d 700. When an emergency arises or there is sudded need for the exercise of the police officer's powers, he cannot wait for specific a......
  • Perrapato v. Rose, No. A--959
    • United States
    • New Jersey Superior Court – Appellate Division
    • April 9, 1964
    ...relief from an alleged violation of his rights under N.J.S.A. 40:47--6. See Albert v. Caldwell, 123 [199 A.2d 388] N.J.L. 266, 268, 8 A.2d 700 (E. & A. 1939); cf. Martini v. Civil Service Commission, 129 N.J.L. 599, 602, 30 A.2d 569 (Sup.Ct.1943). And see Graham v. City of Asbury Park, 69 N......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT