Ekstedt v. Village of New Hope, 42992--3

• Decision Date: 07 January 1972
• Docket Number: No. 42992--3,42992--3
• Citation: 292 Minn. 152,193 N.W.2d 821
• Parties: , 67 Lab.Cas. P 52,711 Daniel EKSTEDT, Respondent, John Oberreuter, Respondent, v. VILLAGE OF NEW HOPE, et al., Appellants.
• Court: Minnesota Supreme Court

Page 821

193 N.W.2d 821

292 Minn. 152, 67 Lab.Cas. P 52,711

Daniel EKSTEDT, Respondent, John Oberreuter, Respondent, v. VILLAGE OF NEW HOPE, et al., Appellants.

No. 42992--3.

Supreme Court of Minnesota.

Jan. 7, 1972.

Syllabus by the Court.

1. The evidence does not support a finding that respondents showed bad faith in submitting their resolutions to the village council rather than proceeding through the police chain of command, city manager, and civil service commission.

2. The evidence does not support a finding that some of the resolutions were published with reckless disragard for the truth of the factual assertions therein, nor does it support the conclusions that those particular resolutions and one other constitute misconduct.

3. The resolutions in issue constitute grievances as referred to in Minn.St. 179.52, and respondents cannot be discharged because of the submission of a grievance under the terms of Minn.St. 179.53. The grievances in question cannot be removed from the protective purview of the pertinent statutes by a finding that respondents were mistaken in their views and opinions.

4. Under the applicable statutes respondents could only be discharged for just cause or for misconduct. The cause or reason for dismissal must relate to the manner in which the employee performs his duties, and the evidence showing the There is no evidence which would support a determination that respondents had performed their duties as police officers in an inadequate fashion.

existence of reasons for dismissal must be substantial.

5. Where a remand to the administrative agency would necessitate findings of fact and conclusions of law in keeping with those of the trial court and any other findings and conclusions by the agency would amount to an error of law, the trial court's interference with the agency's decision is not improper.

The trial court's directive that respondents be reinstated to their former positions was proper inasmuch as a remand for further proceedings would be fruitless.

Corrick & Miller, Robbinsdale, James W. Torke and O. C. Adamson, II, Minneapolis, for appellants.

Robins, Meshbesher, Singer & Spence and Patrick Delaney, Phillip A. Cole, Minneapolis, for respondents.

Heard before KNUTSON, C.J., and MURPHY, KELLY, and HACHEY, JJ.

OPINION

RONALD E. HACHEY, Justice. ^*

This is an appeal from a judgment of the trial court reversing the determination made by the personnel board of the village of New Hope which had upheld and sustained the action taken by the village council in discharging respondents, Daniel Ekstedt and John Oberreuter from their duties as policemen. The action of the village council was based upon written statements, prepared and submitted to their superior officer by respondents, which were determined to have contained language offensive toward fellow public employees, created a situation of incompatibility between respondents and their supervisors and fellow employees, and constituted just cause for dismissal. On appeal, the trial court determined that the decision of the personnel board was not reasonably supported by the evidence and that the dismissals violated various statutory rights of the respondents. The court ordered that they be reinstated to their former positions with back pay. We affirm.

Prior to the summer of 1969, there was dissension within the police department of the village. Some of the disputes were publicized, and some of the heated arguments among police personnel were heard by the citizenry of the village. At one point, Officer Eckstedt had been suspended for a period of 5 days for having made remarks about the chief of police. Various members of the police department had engaged in the practice of relating the departmental disputes to news madia. A grievance procedure had been in effect for more than a year and had been made known to all members of the police department. The disputes and dissension finally resulted in a split of the Policemen's Benevolence Association and the formation of a new one called New Hope Police Federation in the summer of 1969. After the split, the police force was divided approximately evenly between the two organizations.

Prior to July 9, 1969, during a period of bitter discontent, respondents, as president and vice president of the federation, drafted 15 pages of resolutions which dealt with various aspects of the police department, certain members thereof, and various incidents. Three of the resolutions ¹ were found by the personnel board to constitute just cause for dismissal. Rough drafts of the resolutions were shown to other members of the newly formed federation. ² No formal meeting had approved the resolutions, but each of the members contacted gave individual approval of the substance of the resolutions. Several felt, however, that they would have been worded more tactfully.

On July 9, 1969, a copy of the resolutions was submitted to a police sergeant, along with a request that it be sent to the mayor and village council. The copy was given to the chief of police, who made an additional copy thereof and delivered the original to the village manager. Six additional copies were requested by the village manager. The following morning, July 10, two newspaper reporters received copies of the resolutions in their mail. There is no evidence in the record which will support a finding as to who mailed the copies to the news media. During the days that followed, several officers who had seen a rough draft of the resolutions prepared statements repudiating any inference of being associated with respondents. On July 14, however, the whole federation met and retroactively approved the resolutions.

Pursuant to a suggestion by the respondents, the village manager forwarded the resolutions directly to the village council, thereby bypassing the personnel board. On July 14, the council met and determined that respondents be dismissed for the reasons hereinabove stated. A hearing before the personnel board followed in the months of August and September, resulting in findings and conclusions which affirmed the action of the village council. Pursuant to the provisions of Minn.St. 44.09, both the appeal to the district court and the appeal to this court were taken. Respondent Eckstedt is a veteran and is entitled to the benefits of Minn.St. 197.46.

1. Appellants argue that respondents showed bad faith because they did not follow proper grievance procedures. Proper procedure would have been to go through the police chain of command, then to the village manager, and, finally, to the civil service commission. The order setting forth this policy is not explicit. It does contain a diagram of the chain of command, which does not include the civil service commission. The only reference thereto is one sentence, which states: 'The only lateral movement that can be made from the 'chain' would be from the Manager to the Civil Service Commission.' Examination of the record indicates that respondents did not request a hearing before the commission before the matter went to the village council. The village manager, however, could have informed respondents of the proper procedures at the time that the resolutions were brought to him, but he did not do so. It further appears that it was the village manager who bypassed the civil service commission by directly submitting the resolutions to the village council. Under the circumstances we fail to find bad faith on the part of respondents.

2. In finding No. 12, the personnel board found that resolutions on pages 11 and 12 were published with reckless disregard for the truth of the factual assertions therein. As to the truth of the resolution on page 11, Detective Morse admitted that he had not taken a test when he joined the force and was uncertain as to whether or not he took one upon becoming a full-time officer. He did take a test before becoming a detective. It is not clear whether the personnel board considered the resolution as relating to a reclassification of job title or relating to a promotion. Of primary significance is the fact that respondents and all of the officers of the federation thought the resolution was truthful. When this actual belief is coupled with a finding that who of the three allegations about the lack of tests were true, it seems impossible to conclude that they were made with reckless disragard for the truth. Hence, we conclude that the board's finding No. 12 relating to the resolution on page 11 was not supported by the evidence.

The resolution found on page 12 states in part:

'The New Hope Police Officers Federation requests that a complete psychiatric evaluation be conducted on sergeant Lowell Campbell. We feel that this is of the utmost importance to the welfare of the individual members of the police department and the safety of the general community. We further feel that over the past years, this man has exhibited abnormal traits and behavior to the extent that it has (a)ffected the well being of citizens both directly and indirectly.'

The record shows that Sergeant Campbell had never been given the psychological test required of persons more recently employed on the police force. The resolution requested a psychiatric 'evaluation.' By some method, not explained, the board equated 'evaluation' with treatment. There was no mention of treatment in the resolution. The board itself referred to uncontradicted testimony concerning approximately 12 incidents relating to claimed acts of abnormal or irregular behavior on the part of Campbell, but concluded that there was no indication that he had exhibited traits or tendencies remotely similar to those indicated in the resolutions. Those acts and others testified to made men working under Campbell somewhat apprehensive. The board found that the language 'complete psychiatric evaluation' and 'abnormal traits and behavior' was published and submitted with the actual intent of injuring Campbell. A...