Hansen v. Van Winkle

Decision Date08 June 1908
Citation76 N.J.L. 443,69 A. 1011
PartiesHANSEN v. VAN WINKLE, Clerk of Board of Police Com'rs, et al.
CourtNew Jersey Supreme Court

Certiorari on petition of Joseph Hansen against Frank Van Winkle, clerk of the board of police commissioners of Jersey City and another. Judgment for petitioner.

Argued February term, 1908, before REED, PARKER, and VOORHEES, JJ.

Merritt Lane, for prosecutor. James J. Murphy, for defendants.

VOORHEES, J. The prosecutor was, by a Resolution of the police board of Jersey City, on the 3d day of April, 1907, promoted from an acting patrolman to the position of detective sergeant, and, in consequence of such promotion, became entitled to an increase of salary. He entered into the office, and proceeded to perform the duties of a detective sergeant, and was paid the increase of salary to which he was entitled. The duties of the two positions are not the same. On January 24, 1908, the board of police commissioners passed the following resolution: "Whereas, after a diligent search of the records of this board by its clerk, and having been assured that in the case of Detective Sergeant J. Hansen, the law was not complied with inasmuch as no recommendation was made by his captain or any superior officer as to his ability as required by chapter 43, p. 186, Laws 1902; therefore: "Resolved, that said Joseph Hansen be and he is hereby returned to duty as an acting patrolman in his respective grade according to term of service."

This writ brings up the above resolution.

The act cited in the resolution provides:

"Sec. 2. Any and all promotions of any such acting patrolman or similar member of the police force as aforesaid shall only be made for merit, and upon the approval, in writing, of the captain of the said police force, or of the branch thereof under whom said acting patrolman is serving, and the chief of the said police force, and if no such officer, then of the chief of the said police force, as to the good conduct and fitness of the said individual for promotion.

"Sec. 3. Any and all promotions in the said police force from the position of acting patrolman as aforesaid, of any such acting patrolman, shall be made according to meritorious service and duration of service in said police force, and as aforesaid, and not otherwise; Provided, however, that there shall be connected with the said police force acting patrolmen qualified and entitled to promotion under the provisions of this act."

No notice was given to the...

To continue reading

Request your trial
3 cases
  • Vill. of Ridgewood v. Howard
    • United States
    • New Jersey Court of Common Pleas
    • 13 Junio 1935
    ...Law, 350, 35 A. 786, where it was sought to reduce a police sergeant to the inferior position of patrolman. See, also, Hansen v. Van Winkle, 76 N. J. Law, 443, 69 A. 1011; Gutheil v. Nelson, 86 N. J. Law, 1, 91 A. Counsel for the village cites in support of his contention McManus v. City of......
  • Town of Montclair v. Doyle
    • United States
    • New Jersey Supreme Court
    • 22 Julio 1938
    ...of Fire Com'rs of Jersey City, 49 N.J.L. 154, 6 A. 881; Leary v. Mayor of City of Orange, 59 N.J.L. 350, 35 A. 786; Hansen v. Van Winkle, 76 N.J. L. 443, 69 A. 1011; Harrington v. Borough Carteret, 1 N.J.Misc. So that it seems clear that the act relied upon conferred jurisdiction on the Cou......
  • New Jersey Soc'y for Prevention of Cruelty to Animals v. Wilbur
    • United States
    • New Jersey Supreme Court
    • 8 Junio 1908

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT