Frazer v. Alabama State Policemen's Ass'n, Inc.
| Decision Date | 03 June 1977 |
| Citation | 346 So.2d 959 |
| Parties | J. Stanley FRAZER, etc. v. ALABAMA STATE POLICEMEN'S ASSOCIATION, INC., etc. SC 2378. |
| Court | Alabama Supreme Court |
William J. Baxley, Atty. Gen. and Jerry L. Weidler, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.
Edward L. Hardin, Jr., Birmingham, for appellee.
This is an appeal to review an order of the Circuit Court of Montgomery County granting a preliminary injunction. By that order the defendant, as Director of the Alabama State Personnel Department, was enjoined from filling a vacancy in the position of Director of the Division of Marine Police in the Alabama Department of Conservation and Natural Resources, by means other than by promotion. We reverse and remand.
The suit was brought by the Alabama State Policemen's Association, Inc., a non- profit domestic corporation. Membership in this Association is composed of law enforcement officers in the State of Alabama, including those of the Department of Public Safety, the Alcoholic Beverage Control Board, and the Department of Conservation. Also, some of the Association members are State Merit System employees who hold permanent status as Conservation Enforcement Officers III and IV. The Association has as one of its purposes: "To advocate and strive for uniform application of the Civil Service Merit System for appointment and promotion."
On March 26, 1976 the plaintiff-Association filed a complaint for "A declaration and construction of Title 55, § 311," Alabama Code (Recomp.1958), alleging that it and its members would suffer irreparable harm if the vacancy, described above, were filled by the defendant in the manner described by Merit System Announcement No. 76-55, that is, by a combination of "open-competitive" and "promotional" examination. Plaintiff maintains that its members who hold classifications as Conservation Enforcement Officers are eligible for promotion, and that the existing vacancy is required to be filled by promotion "if practicable." The Association also contends that this method of filling vacancies is required by the established State of Alabama policy for filling senior administrative positions. Plaintiff asserts that it being "practicable" to fill this vacancy by promotion, an "open-competitive" examination register would cause plaintiff and its members to suffer irreparable harm. The irreparable harm, plaintiff argues, would occur because "plaintiff would not have achieved its purpose to secure uniform application of the Civil Service Merit System and in that morale in the law enforcement agencies of the State of Alabama, whose employees are members of plaintiff would be harmed in that incentive to strive for exceptional performance in order to gain promotion would be diluted."
Plaintiff made further allegations attacking the announced qualification for taking the examination as unreasonable, erroneous, subjective, and unequal.
The defendant responded to the two-count complaint by filing a motion to dismiss alleging the plaintiff's failure to state a claim upon which relief could be granted and the lack of a justiciable controversy. Following denial of that motion, defendant filed an answer reiterating as defenses that the complaint failed to state a claim which could be afforded relief and denying that plaintiff was entitled to the relief sought in its complaint.
On April 15, 1976, a hearing was held on a motion for a preliminary injunction, after which the trial court granted the Association's motion for preliminary injunction.
The threshold question presented in this case is whether the incorporated Association has standing to enforce the individual rights of its members. Except for the statement contained in the plaintiff's brief that "representatives of the Association, acting as bargaining agents for the members of the Association, met with the appellant . . .," it does not appear from the record that this suit was grounded on behalf of any person, real or statutory, other than the Association itself. The plaintiff's reference in brief in support of its vicarious right as a bargaining agent for the members does not support plaintiff's conclusion. That reference is to the personnel director's testimony concerning a discussion he had with several Association representatives:
I pointed out to them, among other things, that we had people apply for this examination in good faith on the basis of the open competitive announcement, and I thought they had some rights in the matter as well as the members of the State Policeman's Association, or employees of the Department.
This language cannot qualify as proof of a bargaining agency, or of a recognition of any such authority. The Association, accordingly, must rely upon its own being for the standing to maintain this action. In addition, the defendant contends that the Association does not possess the requisite standing in its own capacity.
Rule 17, ARCP, speaks to this point:
(a) . . . Every action shall be prosecuted in the name of the real party in interest. . . .
The "real party in interest" is the party ". . . who possesses the substantive right...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Adler v. Bank of N.Y. Mellon
...was "the party '... who possesse[d] the substantive right being asserted under the applicable law....' " Frazer v. Alabama State Policemen's Ass'n, Inc., 346 So.2d 959, 961 (Ala.1977) (quoting Wright & Miller, Federal Practice & Procedure: Civil § 1541 at 635). Rule 25(c), Ala. R. Civ. P., ......
-
United Council of Loxley, Inc. v. City of Loxley
...So. 486 (1924). The parties argue in their briefs whether the United Council is a proper party plaintiff. Frazer v. Alabama State Policemen's Association, 346 So.2d 959 (Ala.1977). But see Alabama Hospital Association v. Dillard, 388 So.2d 903 (Ala.1980); and Alabama Optometric Association ......
-
ABC Coke v. GASP
...§ 240, but do not have standing "to enforce the separate property rights of [their] individual members." Frazer v. Alabama State Policemen's Ass'n, Inc., 346 So.2d 959, 961 (Ala. 1977). GASP has not asserted that it was injured through the issuance of the permit—for example, that it owned p......
-
State ex rel. Van Buren County Dept. of Social Services by Curtis on Behalf of Williamson v. Dempsey
...right to recover the child support in the URESA action, it becomes the real party in interest. See generally Frazer v. Alabama State Policeman's Ass'n, 346 So.2d 959 (Ala.1977) (the real party in interest possesses the substantive right asserted under the applicable law). See also Robinson ......
-
The Malignant Mystique of "standing"
...2d 914, 918-19 (Ala. 2005).15. See, e.g., Nix v. McElrath, 952 So. 2d 1107, 1110 (Ala. 2006).16. 904 So. 2d 1253, 1256 (Ala. 2004).17. 346 So. 2d 959, 961 (Ala. 1977).18. 952 So. 2d 1107, 1110 (Ala. 2006).19. Lowe v. American Medical Internat'l, 494 So. 2d 413, 415 (Ala. 1986) (Beatty, J., ......