C. Nelson v. City of Eveleth
| Decision Date | 22 May 1936 |
| Docket Number | 30,719 |
| Parties | C. NELSON v. CITY OF EVELETH |
| Court | Minnesota Supreme Court |
Action in the district court for St. Louis county to recover salary alleged to be due plaintiff as a captain in defendant's fire department. There were findings, Edward Freeman, Judge adverse to plaintiff, who appealed from the judgment entered. Affirmed.
Municipal corporation -- officer -- captain of fire department -- compensation.
The city council of defendant has the power to determine the compensation of its officers and employes. By resolution it fixed the monthly salary of plaintiff, a captain in its fire department, at $118.12 per month for a three-quarter time service. He was paid that sum each month and receipted in full on the pay roll. He worked full time. He requested that he have one-fourth time off, but was threatened with discharge by the chief, who had no authority to discharge without cause. No complaint was made to the city council, and the record does not show that the city council knew that plaintiff worked full time. In this action for reasonable value of all services as such captain rendered for some 14 months, it is held:
1. The court cannot ignore the fact that the employment was under an express valid contract, and therefore there can be no recovery on a quisi contract, or for benefits received and retained.
Municipal corporation -- officer -- captain of fire department -- compensation.
2. Plaintiff is estopped by his conduct from claiming for full time, having acquiesced in the reduction, and making no complaint either to the council or the civil service commission.
George H. Lommen and Mark Nolan, for appellant.
M H. Greenberg, Rudolph J. Peshel, M. F. Teplicky, City Attorney, and Philip M. Stone, for respondent.
Plaintiff appeals from the judgment rendered in favor of defendant. The action was tried to the court, who filed findings of fact and conclusions of law. There was no motion for a new trial. Amended findings were requested and denied. There are no assignments of error. And from the plaintiff's brief we understand the findings of fact are not questioned or attacked as unsupported; but the claim is that the conclusion of law directing judgment of dismissal with costs against plaintiff is erroneous.
Defendant is a city of the fourth class operating under a home rule charter. Plaintiff has been in its employ as a captain in the fire department ever since some time prior to July 1, 1932.On July 5, 1932, the common council of defendant passed a resolution that the firemen and policemen should work on a three-quarter time basis, and were to receive a 25 per cent reduction in the monthly wage of June, 1932. On July 8, 1932, the common council passed this resolution:
"That all City of Eveleth full-time monthly employees, except day laborers, work on a three-quarter time basis, such salaries to be based on June, 1932, pay roll, and to become effective July 1, 1932."
Plaintiff, with full knowledge of the resolution, continued to work as captain of the city fire department full time from July 1, 1932, to September 1, 1933, and received each month a check which represented a 25 per cent reduction from the received for June, 1932, for which he signed the pay roll as "Received in full." Plaintiff did demand of the chief of the fire department that he be permitted to take one-quarter time off, and was informed that he would be discharged unless he worked full time; but he made no complaint to the city council or to any member thereof. The city council had the right to change the compensation of the city employes, either by reduction in rate of pay or by putting them on part-time basis. The city civil service commission, duly created and functioning, had the right to hear and determine any charges preferred against a member of the fire department for disobedience of the orders of the chief. The court found that the fire department, during the 14 months involved, was not over-manned; that reasonable efficiency could not be maintained if plaintiff and the other men in the department had taken one-fourth time off, although the department could be operated and protection to life and property given, though not as effectively with all the men on three-quarter time basis; that the fire department did not attempt, by rule or otherwise, to run the department so that the men could take one-quarter time off. Prior to July 1, 1932, plaintiff's monthly wage was $157.50. For the month of July, 1932, and each month thereafter, to and including July, 1933, he received $118.12, and for August, 1933, $130. His services were reasonably worth $157.50 per month during such time.
The complaint alleged that at the special instance and request of defendant plaintiff performed services as a fireman between July 1, 1932, and September 1, 1933, of the value of $2,205 and that he conferred benefits upon defendant in that amount, which it knowingly received, no part of which has been paid except $1,669.44. It is clear that plaintiff was employed by the city at a specific monthly wage; that is, the employment was under an express contract. It is not controverted that, under § 49 of defendant's charter, the city council had the power to fix the compensation for a captain in the fire department; and that no salary can be paid unless so fixed. There was no employment for any definite time; hence there is nothing to hinder the council from either reducing or raising the monthly salary at any time. And the resolutions of July 5 and 8, 1932, must be held valid and effective as reducing plaintiff's monthly salary from $157.50 to $118.12, and as so reduced his salary has been paid in full for the period involved in the suit. Plaintiff ignores the express contract under which he received and receipted for each month's work, and seeks recovery under a quasi contract or on the theory that he worked one-quarter longer each day or month than he was paid for, and the city, having accepted the benefit of the extra work, should pay for the...
To continue reading
Request your trial