Dow v. Casey

• Citation: 194 Mass. 48,79 N.E. 810
• Parties: DOW PEARSON BEALS v. CASEY. DOW PEARSON BEALS v. SAME. DOW PEARSON BEALS v. SAME. DOW PEARSON BEALS v. SAME. DOW PEARSON BEALS v. SAME. DOW PEARSON BEALS v. SAME.
• Decision Date: 08 January 1907
• Court: United States State Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts

194 Mass. 48

79 N.E. 810

DOW PEARSON BEALS v. CASEY. DOW PEARSON BEALS v. SAME. DOW PEARSON BEALS v. SAME. DOW PEARSON BEALS v. SAME. DOW PEARSON BEALS v. SAME. DOW PEARSON BEALS v. SAME.

Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts, Middlesex.

January 8, 1907

COUNSEL

Nathan D. Pratt, John J. Devine, and Robt. J. Crowley, for petitioners.

J Gilbert Hill, City Sol., for respondent.

OPINION

KNOWLTON, C.J.

These six cases all present the same questions. The first three are petitions to prove exceptions, and each of the last three is an appeal from an order of the superior court, affirming an order of the mayor of Lowell removing the applicant for a review from his office as a member of the board of police of the city of Lowell, which order of the superior court includes an order disallowing exceptions taken by the applicant. The three applicants, after a hearing, were removed by the mayor from their respective offices as members of the police board of Lowell. Each of them then filed in the superior court, under Rev. Laws, c. 100, § 4, an application for a review of the charges against him, the evidence submitted thereunder and the findings thereon by the mayor. At the hearing in the superior court on these applications each of the applicants requested certain rulings, and took an exception to the refusal of the judge to give them. The fundamental question is whether this refusal was a subject for an exception, and whether the order affirming the order of the mayor and disallowing the exceptions may be appealed from to this court.

The section of the statute just referred to provides for the removal of license commissioners by the mayor for cause, 'after charges preferred, reasonable notice thereof and a hearing thereon, and the mayor shall in the order of removal state his reasons therefor.' The record shows that a full hearing, occupying many days, was had before the mayor, after general charges had been preferred against the commissioners of which they had notice in writing, and that they were personally present, and were represented by able counsel at the hearing. The mayor, in connection with his order for a removal stated his reasons therefor in writing. No objection was made at the hearing in regard to the form of the charges, their sufficiency, or the notice of the hearing upon them. The requests for rulings at the hearing in the superior court all relate to the preferring of charges, their sufficiency, the notices given to the license commissioners, and the legality of the hearing upon such charges with such notices. The judge of the superior court made full findings of fact in regard to the matters covered by the requests.

The...