Bogle v. Woods, 242.

• Decision Date: 24 June 1932
• Docket Number: No. 242.,242.
• Citation: 161 A. 357
• Parties: BOGLE v. WOODS et al., Com'rs.
• Court: New Jersey Supreme Court

161 A. 357

BOGLE

v. WOODS et al., Com'rs.

No. 242.

Supreme Court of New Jersey.

June 24, 1932.

Certiorari by Horace R. Bogle against John F. Woods and another, Commissioners of Lyndhurst, N. J.

Decision in accordance with opinion.

Argued May term, 1932, before PARKER, CAMPBELL, and LLOYD, JJ.

Carey & Lane, of Jersey City, for prosecutor.

William George, of Jersey City, for defendants.

PER CURIAM.

A certiorari was issued in this case to review two resolutions passed by the board of commissioners of the township of Lyndhurst at its meeting on March 21, 1932. The first resolution purported to appoint Commissioner John F. Woods as director of public affairs and public safety in place of Horace R. Bogle, the prosecutor, and directed that he should have the same powers as Bogle had exercised as director of the department.

The second resolution purported to appoint John A. Flynn as the chief of police. The township is governed by the Walsh Act (Comp. St. Supp. § **136—1 et seq.), and is accorded by that act three commissioners for its government. These commissioners were Bogle, Woods, and one Guidetti. They were elected May 14, 1929, and organized one week later. At the organization meeting Bogle was designated as mayor and assigned to the department of public safety and affairs, Woods to the department of revenue and finance, and Guidetti to streets and public property. As such they acted until March 21st last when the resolutions were passed.

At the inception of this meeting and before the resolutions brought up by the writ were passed, Bogle, as director of public safety, announced that he had appointed one Otto Baer, Jr., as chief of police in the place of the former chief who had died.

The prosecutor contends that both resolutions are invalid, and argues as to the attempted appointment of Woods that it would make him both director of public affairs and public safety and also director of the department of revenue and finance, which is in violation of the act, which provides that each commissioner shall be designated by majority vote of the board of commissioners to be director of one of the departments at the organization meeting; and further contends that the resolution was invalid because it failed to place the prosecutor Bogle in charge of any department.

The act provides that the designation of commissioners so assigned may be changed whenever it appears that the public service would be benefited thereby. Doubtless there would be a presumption that any changes made would be for the benefit of the public service, and we do not see any evidence in the case sufficient to indicate that this is not so in so far as the assignment of Woods to public affairs and public safety was concerned. But whether it was necessary to shift Woods from revenue and finance and substitute Bogle...