Deputy Dir. v. Roberson, 251.

• Decision Date: 12 November 1946
• Docket Number: No. 251.,251.
• Citation: 134 N.J.L. 589,49 A.2d 495
• Parties: MULLEN, Deputy Director, et al. v. ROBERSON, Judge, et al.
• Court: New Jersey Supreme Court

134 N.J.L. 589

49 A.2d 495

MULLEN, Deputy Director, et al.

v.ROBERSON, Judge, et al.

No. 251.

Supreme Court of New Jersey.

Nov. 12, 1946.

Certiorari by Edward A. Mullen, Deputy Director etc., and others, against Horace K. Roberson, Judge, etc., and others, to review the determination of the Hudson County Court of Common Pleas reversing the conviction of respondent Gehm on charges of misconduct and violation of rules of the Department of Public Safety, and his dismissal from the police department in proceedings before the deputy director of the Department of Public Safety of the City of Hoboken, and restoring him to his position as a member of the police department of the city. On rule to show cause why writ should not issue.

Writ denied, and rule to show cause discharged.

May term 1946, before PARKER and DONGES, JJ.

John J. Fallon, of Hoboken, for prosecutors.

Dominick R. Rinaldi, of Hoboken, for respondents.

PER CURIAM.

This matter is before us on a rule to show cause why a writ of certiorari should not issue to review the determination of the Hudson County Court of Common Pleas reversing the conviction of respondent Gehm on charges of misconduct and violation of rules of the Department of Public Safety, and his dismissal from the Police Department in proceedings before the Deputy Director of the Department of Public Safety of the City of Hoboken, and restoring him to his position as a member of the Police Department of said City.

The record was brought before the Court of Common Pleas on a statutory appeal under R.S. 40:47-10, N.J.S.A., and a trial de novo ordered, and at the time fixed by order of the court such trial was had. The responent below put in evidence the record made before the Deputy Director of Public Safety, but offered no oral testimony in the Court of Common Pleas. Motion by Gehm for dismissal was denied, whereupon he took the stand and testified, as did his wife, Rose Gehm. Thereafter the judge concluded that the prosecutor had failed to prove the charges made against Gehm and reversed the conviction and ordered his return to his office or position in the Police Department of the City of Hoboken. It is this determination and order that prosecutors herein seek to have reviewed by certiorari.

Appellant-respondent argues several reasons for the denial of relief to the prosecutors. Amongst others it is urged that the statute provides for a trial de novo, and that such trial requires the production of witnessses and...