Carroll v. City of Bayonne

• Decision Date: 19 March 1925
• Docket Number: No. 261.,261.
• Parties: CARROLL et al. v. CITY OF BAYONNE.
• Court: New Jersey Supreme Court

128 A. 234

CARROLL et al.

v. CITY OF BAYONNE.

No. 261.

Supreme Court of New Jersey.

March 19, 1925.

Certiorari by William E. Carroll and others to review resolutions of Board of Commissioners of City of Bayonne abolishing positions of patrolmen and firemen occupied by prosecutors. Resolutions set aside.

Argued October term. 1924. before KALISCH, BLACK, and CAMPBELL, JJ.

Fallon & Fallon, of Hoboken, for prosecutor.

James Benny, of Bayonne, for defendant.

PER CURIAM. The city of Bayonne has a commission form of government, operating under the so termed "Walsh Act (P. L. 1911, p. 462)." On May 11, 1923, some of the prosecutors were appointed as firemen, and others as policemen, by resolutions passed by the board of commissioners. The appointments were made by the board four days before the expiration of its legal existence, which terminated on the 15th day of May, 1923, at 12 o'clock noon.

The incoming board of commissioners, soon after its organization, on the date last mentioned, rescinded the resolution by which the prosecutors were appointed. The policemen and firemen affected by the resolution sued out writs of certiorari, with the result that the resolution was set aside by a judgment of the Supreme Court, which judgment was affirmed by the Court of Errors and Appeals. Carroll et al. v. City of Bayonne, 124 A. 613. The ground upon which the resolution of the incoming board was set aside was that it had not come into legal existence at the time it passed the rescinding resolution. On the 20th day of May 1924, a year later, the board of commissioners, by a resolution declaring that in its judgment the present financial condition of the city of Bayonne does not warrant, nor do the needs of the police department require, any increase in the number of patrolmen in that department; that therefore, in the exercise of the discretion vested, the board, in the interest of municipal economy, rescind and revoke the resolution of May 11, 1923, by which the prosecutors were appointed, 40 of which were patrolmen and 10 firemen. On the 27th day of May, 1924, the board passed a like resolution as to three more patrolmen and one fireman. In each of the resolutions it is declared that the positions to which the patrolmen and firemen were appointed are abolished.

Both of the resolutions have been removed to this court by writs of certiorari by the prosecutors, and the cases were consolidated by order of this court.

We have not considered all the reasons presented in the brief of counsel on behalf of the prosecutors, since we have reached the result that both of the resolutions must be set aside.

First. It cannot legally affect the tenure of the positions held by the prosecutors, Barry, O'Donnell, Gibson, Joyce, Dittrich. Melofchik, Dwoyanski, Folger, Stein, Nolan, Conn, Vassar, Sweeney, Taylor,...