Donnelly v. Manning

• Decision Date: 02 April 1935
• Citation: 195 N.E. 327,290 Mass. 347
• Parties: DONNELLY v. MANNING et al.
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts Supreme Court

290 Mass. 347

195 N.E. 327

DONNELLY v. MANNING et al.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Suffolk.

April 2, 1935

Exceptions from Supreme Judicial Court, Suffolk County Pierce, Judge.

Petition by Mary E. Donnelly for writ of mandamus to be directed to one Manning. From an order dismissing the petition, petitioner excepts.

Exceptions overruled.

I. Lewis, of Boston, for petitioner.

H. M. Pakulski, Asst. Corp. Counsel, of Boston, for respondents.

CROSBY, Justice.

This is a petition for a writ of mandamus whereby the petitioner seeks reinstatement in employment as an elevator operator at the Boston City Hospital. The case was referred to an auditor who found the following facts: It was admitted and found as a fact that the petitioner was illegally removed from her position as an elevator operator on November 3, 1932, without any charges or reasons therefor being given and without a hearing at that time. On January 4, 1933, the respondents were informed by the law department of the city of Boston that the petitioner was illegally removed and was entitled to reinstatement, but no action was taken at that time. Thereafter the petitioner filed a petition in the Supreme Judicial Court for a writ of mandamus wherein she sought to be restored to her position and to have paid to her salary withheld by reason of her illegal discharge. At the hearing on this petition on April 28, 1933, it was stated by counsel for the respondents that they were satisfied that the petitioner had been removed illegally, and that she would be reinstated and paid the salary due her which had been withheld. By reason of this statement a writ did not issue. Thereafter the petitioner received a letter from counsel for the respondents addressed to them and stating that she should be reinstated and received the back pay due her. The petitioner presented this letter to the superintendent of the respondents between one and two o'clock on April 28, 1933, and she was told to return for work the next morning. She was reinstated and received full compensation for the amount due her. She returned for work the next morning at the regular time and after working for two hours was requested to report to the superintendent who gave her a letter directed to her in which it was stated that she was removed from her position, ‘ said removal to be effective April 29, 1933, for the following reasons: 1. Conduct unbecoming an employee of the hospital. 2. Absence without leave. 3. Insubordination and insolence to superior officers. 4. Failure to report for work on time. 5. Condition unfit for work.’ This letter was signed ‘ Board of Trustees, (Signed) Karl Adams, Acting President.’ The auditor also found that on the morning of April 28, 1933, the trustees authorized the foregoing letter to be written, that it was then and there determined that the petitioner should be discharged again immediately after being reinstated, and that when the petitioner was discharged the second time nothing had occurred between the time of her reinstatement and the time of her second discharge which constituted proper cause for such discharge. Thereafter, on April 29, the petitioner wrote to the chairman of the board of trustees requesting a hearing on the charges in accordance with the provisions of G. L. (Ter. Ed.) c. 31. A hearing was given by the respondents and was held on May 5, 1933, at which the petitioner appeared and was represented by counsel. At the close of the hearing the respondents took the matter under advisement and later on the same day voted as follows: ‘ Decision to remove Mary E. Donnelly from her position of elevator operator at the Boston City Hospital is hereby confirmed,’ and sent the petitioner a letter informing her of their action. The auditor...