Nufer v. Village Bd. of Village of Palmyra, 77-064
Decision Date | 06 November 1979 |
Docket Number | No. 77-064,77-064 |
Citation | 284 N.W.2d 649,92 Wis.2d 289 |
Parties | Ronald NUFER, Appellant, v. VILLAGE BOARD OF VILLAGE OF PALMYRA, Respondents. |
Court | Wisconsin Supreme Court |
Christopher J. Rogers and Smith, Rogers & Smith, Fort Atkinson, submitted briefs for appellant.
David C. Williams and Dempsey & Harrison Law Office, Elkhorn, submitted brief for respondents.
This is an appeal from a judgment affirming the decision of the Palmyra Village Board (Board) removing Ronald Nufer (Nufer) from his position as village police chief.
Nufer had been Chief of Police for ten and one-half years. By resolution dated October 18, 1976, the Fire and Police Committee of the Village of Palmyra referred charges against Nufer to the full seven-member Village Board for hearing. The full Board passed a resolution scheduling a formal hearing on the charges. 1 Notice of the charges and date for hearing were sent to Nufer.
The following charges were preferred against Nufer.
The notice of charges, in addition to specifying the place, date, and time of the hearing, also informed Nufer as follows:
Before the hearing Nufer commenced an action seeking declaratory relief in the circuit court for Jefferson County. Nufer requested the circuit court to declare the Board proceedings unconstitutional and "(t)o appoint an impartial and detached panel to hear and decide the charges against the plaintiff." Nufer also moved the court for an order restraining the Board from holding the planned hearing on December 13 and naming "a neutral and detached decision-making body, no member of which has engaged in the investigation of the charges or has in any way shown himself to be biased toward petitioner concerning said charges." Nufer filed affidavits executed by area residents supporting his claim that two Board members had made statements which indicated they had prejudged the case of removal filed against Nufer. Those Board members filed counter-affidavits denying that they had expressed prejudgment and contending that their statements related their intent to vote to bring charges, and not an intent to vote to remove Nufer.
The court denied Nufer's request for a temporary restraining order, stating it was The court noted that Nufer would have the protection of judicial review and the opportunity to make a complete record, but stated "(t)here is no showing in the record at this time, however, that a fair and impartial hearing by unbiased Village Board members will not take place on December 17th."
The public hearing on the charges was held before the Village Board on December 17, 18, and 28, 1976. At the hearing, the attorney for the Board conducted a voir dire of the Village Board questioning each Board member concerning the member's ability to fairly and impartially consider the evidence and base deliberations on that evidence. Each Board member answered that he felt able to fairly and impartially hear all the evidence. Nufer's attorney did not conduct a voir dire of the Board.
The prosecution produced several witnesses whose testimony gave support to the charges against Nufer. Nufer presented witnesses whose testimony refuted the charges. Nufer also produced six witnesses who testified to statements made by three members of the Board indicating they were predisposed to discharge Nufer before the hearing began.
At the close of testimony, the prosecuting attorney addressed the testimony which suggested that three of the seven board members had prejudged the charges against Nufer. He stated: "I ask you all to examine yourselves, and if any of you feel that you should not sit in the decision making session of this board, then I think you should make it known."
After deliberating in closed session, the Board determined that charges 1, 2, 3, 4, 7, 8, 13, 15, 16, and part of 14 had been proven to be true. By a majority vote, the Board removed Nufer from office as Chief of Police,...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Allenergy Corp. v. Trempealeau Cnty. Env't & Land United Statese Comm.
...the evidence would sustain the Committee's findings, they are conclusive. Id. at 304–05, 519 N.W.2d 782 (citing Nufer v. Village Bd., 92 Wis.2d 289, 301, 284 N.W.2d 649 (1979) ). “Even if we would not have made the same decision, in the absence of statutory authorization, we cannot substitu......
-
Klinger v. Oneida County
...State ex rel. Brookside v. Jefferson Bd. of Adjustment, 131 Wis.2d 101, 120, 388 N.W.2d 593 (1986); Nufer v. Village Board of Palmyra, 92 Wis.2d 289, 301, 284 N.W.2d 649 (1979); Snyder v. Waukesha County Zoning Board, 74 Wis.2d 468, 475-476, 247 N.W.2d 98, 103 (1976); State ex rel. Schleck ......
-
State ex rel. Ortega v. McCaughtry
...committee." State ex rel. Jones v. Franklin, 151 Wis.2d 419, 425, 444 N.W.2d 738, 741 (Ct.App.1989) (quoting Nufer v. Village Bd., 92 Wis.2d 289, 301, 284 N.W.2d 649, 655 (1979)). Ortega argues that the trial court applied the wrong standard in reviewing his challenge to the sufficiency of ......
-
Fran Ingebritson v. Zoning Board of Appeals of City of Madison, George Carran, Zoning Administrator of City of Madison, Linda Grubb, Administrative Neighborhood Preservation Supervisor of City of Madison, City of Madison
...If any reasonable view of the evidence would sustain the ZBA's determination, we affirm. See Nufer v. Village Bd. of Village of Palmyra, 92 Wis.2d 289, 301, 284 N.W.2d 649, 655 (1979). Applying these standards to ZBA's decision not to reopen its July 22, 1993 decision, we conclude it should......