Curry v. Hammond
| Decision Date | 08 February 1944 |
| Parties | CURRY, City Manager, et al. v. HAMMOND. |
| Court | Florida Supreme Court |
Appeal from Circuit Court, Dade County; Marshall C. Wiseheart, judge.
J. W. Watson, of Miami, for appellants.
E. F. P. Brigham, of Miami, for appellee.
In Hammond v. Curry et al., Fla., 14 So.2d 390, we reversed a judgment upholding a suspension order against appellee but permitted the city to file an answer on any defense other than such as might have been concluded by that appeal.
Thereafter the mandate went down and the appellant filed an answer showing compliance with the mandate by reinstating appellee and further alleging that appellee's status as a patrolman was that of an employee and not an officer; the purpose being to set off any earnings of appellee while he had been allegedly suspended.
The question for us to decide is whether appellee, a patrolman on the Miami Police Department, was an officer or an employee.
This Court has defined and distinguished the term 'officer' and 'employee.' See State ex rel. Clyatt v. Hocker, Judge, 39 Fla. 477, 22 So. 721, 63 Am.St.Rep. 174; State ex rel. Holloway v. Sheats, 78 Fla. 583, 83 So. 508; State ex rel. Dresskell v. City of Miami et al., Fla., 13 So.2d 707; Glendinning v. Curry, City Manager, et al., Fla., 14 So.2d 794.
It can hardly be questioned that a patrolman on a city police force is clothed with sovereign power of the city while discharging his duty. In that event his status is that of an officer under the above cited cases. Appellant contends that insofar as the patrolman's relationship to the public is concerned he is an officer but as between the patrolman and the city he is an employee. True, he is an employee of the city but he is also an officer. It is the character of duty performed that must determine his status.
The lower court was correct in holding appellee an officer and the judgment is affirmed.
TERRELL, J., not participating.
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Hord
...926; Temple v. City of New Britain, 127 Conn. 170, 15 A.2d 318; State ex rel. Green v. Glenn, 39 Del. 584, 4 A.2d 366; Curry v. Hammond, 154 Fla. 63, 16 So.2d 523; Buchholtz v. Hill, 178 Md. 280, 13 A.2d 348; Olson v. City of Highland Park, 312 Mich. 688, 20 N.W.2d 773, 21 N.W.2d 286; Dunca......
-
Robbin v. Brewer
...63 So.2d 321; county detective, State ex rel. Watson v. Hurlbert, 1945, 155 Fla. 531, 20 So.2d 693; city patrolman, Curry v. Hammond, 1944, 154 Fla. 63, 16 So.2d 523; city clerk, State ex rel. Gibbs v. Bloodworth, 1938, 134 Fla. 369, 184 So. 1; assistant county solicitors, State ex rel. Dav......
-
Wise v. City of Knoxville
...not an officer; but a mayor, a sheriff or a judge is an officer. Kirmse v. City of Gary, 114 Ind.App. 558, 51 N.E.2d 883; Curry v. Hammond, 154 Fla. 63, 16 So.2d 523; Caswell v. Somerville Retirement System, 306 Mass. 373, 28 N.E.2d 231; Murphy v. Industrial Commission, 355 Ill. 419, 189 N.......
-
Town of Pembroke Park v. Florida State Lodge, Fraternal Order of Police
...in ruling that police officers were not entitled to gross back pay without any set-offs. It argues that, as was held in Curry v. Hammond, 154 Fla. 63, 16 So.2d 523 (1944), Paquin v. City of Lighthouse Point, 330 So.2d 866 (Fla. 4th DCA 1976), and Maudsley v. City of North Lauderdale, 300 So......