Barnes v. Macken
| Decision Date | 16 May 1958 |
| Docket Number | No. 37429,37429 |
| Citation | 90 N.W.2d 222,252 Minn. 412 |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
| Parties | Guy E. BARNES, Petitioner, Appellant, v. James J. MACKEN, Individually, and as Police Chief of the City of Rochester, et al., Respondents. |
Syllabus by the Court
1. Under the provisions of Rule 19 of the Rules of the Police Civil Service Commission of Rochester, petitioner's position as number one eligible to the position of assistant chief of police of the city expired approximately 16 days after filing of the notice of appeal by automatic cancellation. The rule is without a saving clause and therefore by its terms confers no rights except as therein provided.
2. The Rules of the Police Civil Service Commission of Rochester are based upon and founded in the legislative will and the provisions adopted which provide for administrative action and supervision are beyond the control of either party, or of this court to grant relief from the effect of the automatic cancellation provision which is implicit in Rule 19.
3. While it may be suggested that a decision of the case presented on this appeal would serve as a precedent in other cases and should therefore be rendered, the answer must be that the present condition of this action renders it a moot case and not a real controversy.
4. It is well settled by decisions of this court that if, pending an appeal, an event occurs which renders it impossible to grant any relief to appellant, or which makes a decision unnecessary, the appeal will be dismissed as moot.
5. Except by legislative enactment, the life of an eligible list may not, either directly or indirectly, be extended beyond the satutory period where there is no saving clause.
Foley & Foley, Rochester, for appellant.
Brill & Brill, Minneapolis, James T. Spillane, Rochester, for respondent Nelson.
R. V. Ehrick, City Atty., Rochester, for respondents.
Guy E. Barnes filed his petition for an alternative writ of mandamus with the district court on November 16, 1956, and the court issued its order allowing the writ on the same day. The writ commanded respondent Arnold M. Nelson forthwith to vacate the position of assistant chief of police of the city of Rochester, Minnesota, and to cease accepting the salary and discharging the duties and responsibilities thereof. It commanded the other respondents, including the individual members and secretary of the Police Civil Service Commission of the city of Rochester, to certify Guy E. Barnes as the number one eligible for employment in the position of assistant chief of police.
The petitioner had previously been certified as the number one eligible for assistant chief of police on October 20, 1955. His certification was for the period of 2 years and it expired automatically on October 20, 1957, under the rules adopted by the said Police Civil Service Commission.
The matter was heard before the trial court without a jury on June 26, 1957. The court ordered judgment in favor of respondents. A stay was thereafter entered and the case later ordered settled on October 4, 1957. Petitioner's motion for a new trial was heard October 4, 1957, and denied. On the same date he filed a notice of appeal to this court.
Petitioner sought by the mandamus proceedings below, and now by appeal to this court, to have the position of assistant chief of police declared legally vacant and himself placed in that position as the number one eligible therefor. In addition petitioner urges that he is entitled to veterans preference in public employment as provided for in the statutes of the State of Minnesota and that since respondent Nelson is not a veteran he is not entitled to preference under said statutes.
1. M.S.A. c. 419 provides that there may be created in every village or city, except a city of the first class, of this state, a Police Civil Service Commission with powers and duties as provided therein. Sections 419.06(5), 419.10, 419.25(d), and 419.29 of c. 419, establishing police civil service commissions, provide that any police civil service commission may by rule provide for striking any name from the eligible register upon which the name has been placed after it has remained thereon for 2 years. Rule 19 of the Rules of the Civil Service Commission for the Police Department of the city of Rochester provides:
Clearly, under the provisions of this rule petitioner's position as number one eligible to the position of assistant chief of police of the city of Rochester expired October 20, 1957, approximately 16 days after filing of the notice of appeal. Automatic cancellation definitely removed his name, as originally approved, from the list. The rule is without a saving clause and therefore by its terms confers no rights except as therein provided.
2. Thus there is presented a situation where an event occurred on October 20, 1957, which renders it impossible for this court to grant any effectual relief to the petitioner. While this intervening event is not owing to petitioner's own act, it is nevertheless founded in the provisions of c. 419 and the Police Civil Service Commission rules adopted for the city of Rochester. These rules are based upon and founded in the legislative will and the provisions adopted which provide for administrative action and supervision are beyond the control of either party, or of this court to grant relief from the effect of the automatic cancellation provision which is implicit in Rule 19.
3. This court has held under similar circumstances, in numerous decisions, that it is powerless to grant relief after the expiration of the period during which the right conferred may be asserted and therefore will not proceed to judgment. We are confronted with a situation in the present appeal when the affirmance or reversal of the order made by the trial court will make no difference in respect to the controversy involved or on the merits in regard to petitioner's claim. We have heretofore held that because of an expiration of a license a decision of the case on its merits would not benefit either party to the proceeding. 1 We have repeatedly said that under such circumstances the court's decisions should be limited to real controversies where actual existing facts and issues are involved and rights asserted thereunder. While it may be suggested that a decision of the case presented on this appeal would serve as a precedent in other cases and should therefore be rendered, the answer must be that the present condition of this action renders it a moot case and not a real controversy.
4. As was said by this court in Works v. Tiber, 169 Minn. 172, 173, 210 N.W. 877, 878: 'We make precedents only as incident to the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Minnegasco, Application of
...to decide actual controversies. See Elzie v. Commissioner of Pub. Safety, 298 N.W.2d 29, 32 (Minn.1980); Barnes v. Macken, 252 Minn. 412, 415, 90 N.W.2d 222, 226 (1958); Johnson v. Dosland, 103 Minn. 147, 148-49, 114 N.W. 465, 466 (1908). Although exceptions exist, see, e.g., Falgren v. Sta......
-
State ex rel. Longman v. Kachelmacher
...which renders it impossible for the court to grant any effectual relief, the court will dismiss the appeal as moot. Barnes v. Macken, 252 Minn. 412, 90 N.W.2d 222. 3. The Minneapolis City Charter 3 requires that vacancies in civil service positions be filled by the 'highest name from the ap......
-
NORTHWESTERN STATE BANK, ETC. v. Gangestad
...A saving clause is a specific statutory provision, not one inferred by a court from selected words of a statute. Barnes v. Macken, 252 Minn. 412, 90 N.W.2d 222 (1958). See, e.g., Minn. Stat. § 353.46 (1978). Minn.Stat. § 334.011 (1978) does not contain such a The defendant finally urges tha......
-
Marque Plumbing, Inc. v. Barris, C8-85-1979
...will be dismissed. In re Township of Glendale, Scott County, 288 Minn. 340, 343, 180 N.W.2d 925, 927 (1970); Barnes v. Macken, 252 Minn. 412, 415, 90 N.W.2d 222, 226 (1958). Further, decisions by a court "should be limited to real controversies involving existing facts and rights asserted t......