State ex rel. Chernesky v. Civil Service Commission of City of Bridgeport

• Decision Date: 13 July 1954
• Court: Connecticut Supreme Court
• Parties: STATE ex rel. CHERNESKY et al. v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION OF CITY OF BRIDGEPORT et al. Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut

Page 713

106 A.2d 713

141 Conn. 465

STATE ex rel. CHERNESKY et al. v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION OF CITY OF BRIDGEPORT et al.

Supreme Court of Errors of Connecticut.

July 13, 1954.

Vincent P. Adley, Bridgeport, for the appellants (plaintiffs).

John V. Donnelly, Bridgeport, for the appellees (defendants).

Before INGLIS, C. J., BALDWIN, O'SULLIVAN, WYNNE and DALY, JJ.

O'SULLIVAN, Associate Justice.

There is no dispute between the parties as to the facts. They can be summarized as follows: In 1935 the General Assembly established by special act a civil service system for the city of Bridgeport. 22 Spec.Laws 261. Since then, all positions in the municipal fire department have been in the competitive division of the classified service under the administration of the named defendant, hereinafter called the commission. By amendments in 1943 and 1945, the commission is required, except in one situation which is not pertinent, to add five points to the earned rating received by an honorably discharged war veteran on any promotional examination he may have taken, and ten points if he has a service-connected disability. 24 Spec.Laws 212, 789.

On December 3, 1949, the commission held an examination for the purpose of preparing an eligibility list for the position of lieutenant in the fire department. Among those participating were the seven plaintiffs, all honorably discharged war veterans and hence entitled to the preferrence points. Forty candidates, including the plaintiffs, passed the examination, and on March 20, 1950, they were listed in the order of their respective earned ratings. The list was posted in a book maintained for the purpose in the office of the defendant Linley, the commission's personnel director, and each person who had thus become eligible for promotion was immediately notified of his rating and of his numerical position on the list.

There were four subjects covered by the examination. One of them required a written test. Acting under an opinion rendered by the city attorney on June 15, 1944, the commission added preference points only to the rating received by an honorably discharged war veteran on the written test. On July 8, 1952, the Supreme Court of Errors handed down an opinion in the case of State ex rel. Higgins v. Civil Service Commission, 139 Conn. 102, 90 A.2d 862. It was therein determined that the method used by the commission in applying the preference points was incorrect and that the points should be added to the rating received on each subject.

Under § 9 of the civil service act, the life of the eligibility list was limited to two years. 22 Spec.Laws 264, § 9. In March, 1952, it ceased to exist as a list from which certifications of appointment to the position of fire lieutenant could be made. While the list was in force, those whose names were recorded from 1 to 24, inclusive, were certified in the order of their standing to the board of fire commissioners and, by that board, were subsequently appointed as fire lieutenants. The sequence in which the plaintiffs' names, according to their numerical standing, appeared on the list was as follows: Parks, 26th; Chernesky, 27th; McNamara, 28th; Moore, 29th; Turner, 30th; Evers, 31st; Hurley, 33d. Had the correct method of applying the preference points been used, they would have stood 7th, 17th, 19th, 20th, 25th, 28th and 29th, respectively. Under that method, the names of Parks, Chernesky, McNamara and Moore would have been in the first twenty-four, and hence those men would have been certified in place of four others.

At no time while the list was in effect did any of the plaintiffs protest that it did not correctly set forth the relative standing of the persons appearing thereon, nor did any of the plaintiffs demand appointment in the place of any others who were certified. It was not until August 20, 1952, that the plaintiff Chernesky sent a letter to the commission asserting his grievance as to his standing on the eligibility list.

The plaintiffs, in bringing this action, ¹ sought an order, in the nature of a mandamus, requiring the defendants to restore them 'to a status of eligibility for appointment to the position of lieutenant in the Fire Department of the City of Bridgeport.' The court found the issues for the defendants, and from the judgment rendered thereon the plaintiffs have appealed.

There are several weaknesses in the plaintiffs' position, but only one need be discussed since it is determinative of the appeal. The civil service act passed by the General Assembly for the city of Bridgeport regulates all phases of appointment to and of promotion in the fire department. 22 Spec.Laws 261. Whatever rights the plaintiffs have respecting their status in that department are derived from that act. In addition to serving as a source of rights, the act impose upon some of them a limitation which must be judicially honored as long as it is reasonable and does not interfere with vested interests acquired by the departmental personnel. The particular limitation to which we refer is that set forth in the provision terminating the eligibility lists at the end of two years. 22 Spec.Laws 264, § 9. In seeking to assert rights claimed by them under the act, the plaintiffs are also bound by the limitation which it imposes.

The act requires that the commission conduct competitive examinations from time to time in order to obtain a list of those who have...