Duffe v. Zych, 47721
| Decision Date | 21 August 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. 47721,47721 |
| Citation | 676 S.W.2d 70 |
| Parties | William C. DUFFE and James M. Shea, Plaintiffs-Respondents, v. Thomas E. ZYCH, et al., Defendants-Appellants. |
| Court | Missouri Court of Appeals |
Bruce Nangle, Stephen J. Nangle, Clayton, for defendants-appellants.
James J. Wilson, City Counselor, St. Louis, for plaintiffs-respondents.
This appeal involves a dispute between the Executive and Legislative branches of the municipal government of the City of St. Louis, Missouri, relative to a Resolution adopted by the Board of Alderman of the City of St. Louis whereby the Mayor, Appointing Authorities and the Personnel Director of the City of St. Louis were directed to rescind lay-off notices given to certain unidentified city employees until such time as the 1983-84 budget should be adopted by the Board of Alderman.
Under the scheme of the City Charter of the City of St. Louis, the Board of Estimate and Apportionment is the monitoring and fiscal manager of the City finances. On June 10, 1983, a projected budget approved by the Board of Estimate and Apportionment had been introduced in the Board of Aldermen as a Board Bill, but it had not been considered by any Committee of the Board or by the Board of Aldermen as a whole.
Pursuant to budget decisions of the Board of Apportionment, with the concurrence of the Mayor, the appointing authorities of the City had caused employees of the City of St. Louis to be laid off from their employment effective June 3, 1983, at 5:00 p.m. Other employees of the City were being or would be laid off at a later date due to the budget decisions of the Board of Estimate and Apportionment, with the concurrence of the Mayor, after being reviewed and approved by Mr. Duffe, Director of Personnel, in accordance with Article XVIII of the Charter and the rules and regulations of the Civil Service Commission and the Department of Personnel. Mr. Shea, the Director of Streets, had ordered and was continuing to order layoffs in his department.
On June 10, 1983 the Board of Aldermen adopted Floor Substitute for Resolution No. 44, (hereinafter Resolution No. 44) wherein it directed Duffe and all appointing authorities, including Mr. Shea, to reinstate all persons laid-off from their employment with the City of St. Louis and authorized the Board of Aldermen to commence legal proceedings to "stop the lay-off implementation and reinstate employees already laid-off."
On the same day, this suit was instituted by Duffe, as a resident and taxpayer of the City of St. Louis and as the Director of Personnel of the City of St. Louis pursuant to Article XVIII, Section 8 of the Charter of the City of St. Louis, and Shea, as a resident and taxpayer of the City of St. Louis and the Director of Streets of the City of St. Louis, for a Declaratory Judgment and Injunctive relief. The defendants are Thomas E. Zych, the President of the Board of Aldermen, and the members of the Board of Aldermen in their official capacities. A Motion for Preliminary Injunction was filed with the petition. Plaintiffs sought a declaration that: Resolution No. 44 was invalid and of no force and effect and an order of the Court permanently enjoining the defendants, (1) from attempting to take any action pursuant thereto, or (2) expending any public funds in connection therewith. An Order to Show Cause was issued the same day directed to the defendants returnable the 16th of June, 1983.
On the return date the defendants filed their Answer and Counterclaim for a declaration that the layoff orders were a nullity, for an order directing Duffe to rescind his approval of all orders of layoffs prior to ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
State v. Boyd
...v. Baine, 630 S.W.2d 569 (Mo. banc 1982); Personal Finance Co. of Missouri v. Day, 349 Mo. 1139, 164 S.W.2d 273 (1942); Duffe v. Zych, 676 S.W.2d 70 (Mo.App.1984); Carrothers v. Beal, 565 S.W.2d 807 Boyd urges us to decide the issues presented by the appeal for the purpose of clarifying the......
-
In the Interest of : C.a.D. v. Juvenile Officer
...moot when it seeks a judgment upon some matter that would lack any practical effect on any then existing controversy. Duffe v. Zych, 676 S.W.2d 70, 72 (Mo. App. E.D. 1984). A case becomes moot when an event occurs making it impossible for an appellate court to grant effective relief. K.E.B.......
-
C.A.D., In re
...moot when it seeks a judgment upon some matter that would lack any practical effect on any then existing controversy. Duffe v. Zych, 676 S.W.2d 70, 72 (Mo.App. E.D.1984). A case becomes moot when an event occurs making it impossible for an appellate court to grant effective relief. K.E.B. v......
-
Morgan County v. Labor & Indus. Relations Com'n
...164 S.W.2d 273 (Mo.1942); Carrothers v. Beal, 565 S.W.2d 807 (Mo.App.1978); Warren v. Warren, 601 S.W.2d 683 (Mo.App.1980); Duffe v. Zych, 676 S.W.2d 70 (Mo.App.1984); State ex rel. Dallavalle v. Baine, 630 S.W.2d 569 (Mo. banc All concur. APPENDIX One of the objected to Morgan County wage ......