Geyer v. Triplett, No. 46846.

• Court: United States State Supreme Court of Iowa
• Writing for the Court: MANTZ
• Citation: 237 Iowa 664,22 N.W.2d 329
• Parties: GEYER et al. v. TRIPLETT, Superintendent of Public Safety.
• Decision Date: 21 June 1946
• Docket Number: No. 46846.

237 Iowa 664
22 N.W.2d 329

GEYER et al.
v.
TRIPLETT, Superintendent of Public Safety.

No. 46846.

Supreme Court of Iowa.

April 2, 1946.
Rehearing Denied June 21, 1946.

Appeal from District Court, Polk County; Tom K. Murrow, Judge.

Suit in mandamus to compel the Superintendent of Public Safety of Des Moines, Iowa, to demote one appointed under the civil service law and to appoint one of claimants under the soldiers' preference statute. The trial court dismissed the petition.

Reversed and remanded.

[22 N.W.2d 330]

Ralph N. Lynch, of Des Moines, for appellants.

F. T. Van Liew, Paul Hewitt, and Harvey Bogenrief, all of Des Moines, for appellee.

MANTZ, Justice.

The present controversy grows out of an appointment made on June 11, 1945, by Charles F. Triplett, Superintendent of Public Safety of Des Moines, Iowa, wherein he promoted John W. Rider, sometimes known as John Rider, from the position of patrolman to that of sergeant in said department.

This appointment was and is challenged by Stanger R. Geyer, Louis J. Volz, and E. W. Ervin, all members of the police force of such city and all having the rank of patrolmen. These objectors are the plaintiffs herein. Rider, the appointee, and the three objectors had been members of such police force for a number of years; all were eligible to promotion under and by virtue of the civil service statute. Rider is an honorably discharged sailor of the regular United States navy, having served therein from July 7, 1921, to July 6, 1925. He had no other military service. All of the plaintiffs are honorably discharged soldiers of the war with Germany which ended in 1918, and all became eligible to promotion on July 15, 1943.

Rider was promoted on June 11, 1945, and on June 20th following, plaintiffs made written demand that Triplett, as superintendent of public safety of such city, demote Rider from the position of sergeant and appoint one of the three plaintiffs to such position, basing their demands upon their superior rights to Rider under the Soldiers' Preference Law as set forth in Chapter 60, Code of Iowa 1939. Such demand was refused and the plaintiffs brought an action in mandamus to enforce their demand. Upon hearing in the district court their petition was dismissed and this appeal followed.

I. It will be observed that this is a contest between what might be termed a peacetime veteran on the one hand and three war veterans on the other, as to preference rights in promotion from the position of patrolman to that of sergeant in

[22 N.W.2d 331]

the police department of the city of Des Moines, Iowa. All had been members of the police force for a number of years; all were on the civil service list, and therefore all were eligible to promotion. In the civil service examination the three war veterans outranked the peacetime veteran.

The ultimate question is the respective rights of promotion as between Rider and appellants. No civilian rights are involved. The facts are not in dispute. Those essential have heretofore been set forth. They are shown by the unchallenged pleadings and the stipulation entered into by the parties when the case was tried.

The court in its conclusions of law made at the time the decree of dismissal was filed held, among other things:

(1) Plaintiffs' positions on the eligible list under civil service do not grant a preference.

(2) The plaintiffs, as wartime veterans on the eligible list for civil service promotion have no prior and superior rights and preference over John W. Rider, an honorably discharged sailor of the regular United States navy in peacetime.

(3) That the appointment of John W. Rider was made under the civil service law and the provisions as to preference contained in the civil service law itself control, and as to such appointments the provisions of Chapter 60 do not apply.

Appellants challenge the correctness of such conclusions. They contend that their rights to promotion over John W. Rider are superior by reason of the provisions of Chapter 60 of the Code of 1939 and particularly section 1159 thereof.

On the other hand, appellee contends that the statute involved under the record herein is section 5697 of the chapter on civil service.

Evidently the trial court was of the opinion that the preference which controlled was the one referred to in the Civil Service Act, and particularly section 5697 thereof, and that the preference granted in Chapter 60 of the 1939 Code of Iowa had no application to the record in this case. The language of these two sections is as follows:

‘Section 1159. Appointments and promotions. In every public department and upon all public works in the state, and of the counties, cities, towns, and school boards thereof, including those cities acting under special charters, honorably discharged soldiers, sailors, marines, and nurses from the army and navy of the United States in the late civil war, Spanish-American war, Phillipine insurrection, China relief expedition, or war with Germany, who are citizens and residents of this state, shall, except in the position of school teachers, be entitled to preference in appointment, employment, and promotion over other applicants of no greater qualifications.’

‘Section 5697. Preferences. In all examinations and appointments under the provisions of this chapter, honorably discharged soldiers, sailors, or marines of the regular or volunteer army or navy of the United States shall be given preference, if otherwise qualified.’

It will be noted that there is a difference in these two sections. The difference deals with both classification and application. Obviously, the coverage of section 5697 would exceed that of section 1159. The first (section 5697) covers all honorably discharged...