Cox v. Norton Police Dept.
| Decision Date | 27 September 2000 |
| Docket Number | 990171 |
| Citation | 2000 MBAR 418 |
| Parties | Christopher L. Cox v. Norton Police Department et al.1 |
| Court | Massachusetts Superior Court |
Mass L. Rptr. Cite: 13 Mass. L. Rptr. 473
Judge (with first initial, no space for Sullivan, Dorsey, and Walsh): VOLTERRA
The defendants move pursuant to Mass.R.Civ.P. 56 for summary judgment on all claims brought against them by the plaintiff Christopher L. Cox ("Cox").2 Cox, through an amended complaint, alleges that the defendant Town of Norton and Norton Police Department (collectively, "the Town") breached an oral agreement to hire Cox as a regular police officer (Count I) and a special police officer (Count II). Cox further alleges that the defendant Benton W. Keene, Jr. ("Keene") breached an oral agreement to hire Cox as a special police officer (Count III), and that Keene breached an oral agreement to recommend Cox for hire as a special police officer (Count IV) and as a regular police officer (Count V). Cox also alleges that Keene intentionally misrepresented the hiring process factually so as to deceive Cox (Count VI).
The defendants assert that they are entitled to judgment as a matter of law on Cox's claims as Cox fails to produce specific facts that establish the existence of any material fact which would defeat their motion. For the reasons that follow, I ALLOW the Town's motion for summary judgment as to all of Cox's claims against it. I further allow Keene's motion for summary judgment on Count III. With respect to Counts IV, V, and VI, the defendants' motions are DENIED.
The material, undisputed facts from the summary judgment record, and where genuinely disputed, taken in the light most favorable to the plaintiff are as follows.
The Town of Norton Police Department employed Keene for thirty-seven years. Keene advanced through the Department's ranks and was ultimately appointed chief of police in 1975. Cox has been a resident of Norton for most of his life, and was twenty-six years old at the time of the operative events in this case. Keene knew Cox, having first met him when Cox was a high school student.
In June 1996, the Town requested a certification for the appointment of four police officers. Subsequent to this request the Town received grant money that allowed it to increase its planned hires to six police officers. Cox was placed seventh on a certification list received by the Town. Cox received his employment interview notice form dated June 26, 1996 from the Department of Personnel Administration, and thereafter appeared at the Norton Police Department to sign the certification indicating his willingness to be appointed as a police officer. When Cox went to the Police Department, Keene's secretary informed him that Keene was not available. Cox was not allowed to sign the list because it was the Chief's policy that candidates only sign in his presence. Cox left his employment interview notice with the secretary and noted his telephone numbers thereon. The secretary noted receipt of the interview notice on Cox' s copy of the notice.
Cox made several attempts to sign the certification but when he appeared at the police station or called to determine when the Chief would be available he was not able to meet the Chief at the station in order to sign the certification. The Chief made two calls to Cox, but was not successful in speaking with him. Consequently, Cox never signed the certification list.
Keene interviewed five other applicants for the available positions. Keene recommended the appointment of these individuals as police officers to the town manager, who is the appointing authority for the Town. Keene has testified that he did not consider Cox for the position because Cox never signed the list indicating his interest in appointment. The town manager is also the appointing authority for special police officers, acting upon Keene's recommendations. In the past, the town manager has generally followed Keene's recommendations in the appointment of police officers. On two specific occasions, however, the town manager in fact did not follow Keene's recommendation. See Keene Depo. p. 16. On one occasion, the town manager turned down Keene's recommendation to appoint a candidate as a special police officer. Keene Depo. p. 46. On another occasion, the town manager rejected Keene's recommendation to promote a patrolman to police sergeant. See id. The town manager never rejected Keene's recommendations to appoint officers as an initial hire off of the certification list during his tenure as chief. See Keene Depo., p. 46.
In August of 1996, the Town requested that the Massachusetts Human Resources Division ("HRD," formerly known as the Department of Personnel Administration) approve the hiring of the five chosen individuals as police officers. The town manager approved Keene's five recommendations for new hires as police officers. Four of these individuals ranked below Cox on the civil service list.
On April 14, 1997, Cox made a written inquiry of HRD concerning these appointments. By letter dated May 1, 1997, HRD stated that, "Mr. Cox should have been considered for one of the positions of Police Officer." Exh. 9. The HRD informed Keene that the appointments of the individuals ranked below Cox on the civil service list "cannot be approved until a satisfactory resolution of the above discrepancies have been reached." Id.
This action by HRD prompted Keene to telephone Cox to invite him to come to the police department to discuss the matter. Subsequently, on May 7, 1997, Keene met with Cox at the police department. At the meeting, Keene told Cox that there had been a misunderstanding about Cox's interest in becoming a police officer. Keene told Cox that he had not been considered an applicant for the officer position because Keene had assumed that Cox was no longer interested in the job. Keene told Cox that the best way to enter the department was to begin as a special police officer. Keene told Cox that it was his policy to initially place applicants on the force as "special police officers, train them, observe them and encourage them to later take the civil service exam to become full-time employees..." At that point, Keene indicated that he would "like to offer [Cox] the position of special police officer" to get Cox "in the door." Cox Depo. p. 125-26. Keene then told Cox that he would give Cox the next full-time opening as the department gets funding for another position. Cox Depo., p. 126.
Keene went on to discuss his reservations about Cox's association with his friends, particularly the Freeman family. Cox Depo., p. 127. Specifically, Keene told Cox that his friend Paul Freeman "is trouble," and advised Cox to disassociate from the Freemans entirely.
By the close of the conversation, Cox agreed to the special officer position. Cox Depo., p. 137. Keene requested, however, that Cox write a letter to HRD explaining that "we talked things over and you feel that we resolved our discrepancy or our problems." Keene asked Cox to bring the letter to him so he could "take a look at it before you send it off." Cox Depo., p. 137. Cox agreed and returned to the police department with the letter a few days later. Keene reviewed the letter in which Cox wrote that: Keene told Cox to send the letter, which Cox did. Cox understood that potential full-time employment with the town would necessitate Cox's satisfactory completion of a background check, physical and psychological screening, and completion of the police academy.
Cox completed an application for a Norton Police Department position on May 9, 1997. Detective-Sergeant Eisnor completed Cox's background investigation on July 24, 1997. The background investigation form does not list any negative employment aspects. Detective-Sergeant Eisnor noted in the interview section of the form that Cox "has had problems with girlfriends and Criminal Charges with this dept."
In October of 1997, Cox's friend Paul Freeman was arrested for assault with a deadly weapon for an incident that occurred in front of Cox's house. The weapon allegedly involved in the incident belonged to Cox. At that time Keene indicated to Cox that he was not going to hire Cox in any capacity as a police officer because of Cox's on-going association with this particular friend. Cox subsequently appealed the Town's decision not to hire him as either a special or regular police officer to the Civil Service Commission. In its decision, the Civil Service Commission stated that, The Civil Service Commission ordered the Town to place Cox's name at the top of the Civil Service list for the next appointment as police officer in the Norton Police Department. The Town did not choose to appoint Cox to any police officer position. In a letter dated November 8, 1999, the HRD acknowledged that the Town's reasons submitted for bypassing Cox's application for appointment were sufficient.
This court grants summary judgment where there are no genuine issues of material fact and where the summary judgment record entitles the moving part...
To continue reading
Request your trial