State ex rel. Dietrich v. Miller

• Decision Date: 27 October 1964
• Citation: 130 N.W.2d 768,25 Wis.2d 371
• Parties: STATE ex rel. Wilbur J. DIETRICH, Respondent, v. Raymond MILLER et al., as members of the Civil Service Comm. of the City of West Allis, et al., Appellants.
• Court: Wisconsin Supreme Court

Page 768

130 N.W.2d 768

25 Wis.2d 371

STATE ex rel. Wilbur J. DIETRICH, Respondent, v. Raymond MILLER et al., as members of the Civil Service Comm.

of the City of West Allis, et al., Appellants.

Supreme Court of Wisconsin.

Oct. 27, 1964.

William T. Schmid, City Atty., Frederick A. Miller, Asst. City Atty., West Allis, for appellants.

Clyde E. Sheets, Milwaukee, for respondent.

WILKIE, Justice.

The single issue that is determinative of this appeal is whether the trial court erred in setting aside the Civil Service Commission's findings.

The Civil Service Commission found:

'2. That since 1955 the assessor of the city of West Allis has made changes in the duties and organization of that office, including (1) the completion of new land maps for the entire city, (2) a key-numbering system for all parcels of real estate, (3) the correlation of all assessment data with the tax roll utilizing IBM equipment, and (4) the completion of all special projects and studies.

'3. That these aforesaid measures resulted in material changes in the duties and organization of the office of the city assessor, so that the total work load of the office could be efficiently administered without the services of a junior assistant assessor.'

The commission concluded (1) that the layoff was made because of these 'material changes in the duties and organization of the office.' (2) that 'the city assessor acted in good faith in effecting the layoff,' and (3) that Dietrich's seniority rights had not been violated.

The trial court reviewed the record and concluded (1) that the commission's ruling was 'arbitrary and unreasonable,' (2) that the credible evidence showed that Dietrich was not discharged for the purpose alleged in the findings, (3) that the discharge was a 'sham and a subterfuge intended to evade the tenure fo office and civil service laws,' and (4) that the evidence did not support the commission's findings that Dietrich's seniority rights had not been violated and that the assessor acted in good faith.

Dietrich's rights and the proper administrative procedure for reviewing the layoff action are controlled by the provisions of the 1938 West Allis Code, because the layoff action was taken on September 12th before the new West Allis Code took effect. In any event, both ordinances contained an identical provision permitting a layoff on the grounds found by the commission. Specifically, sec. 14.06(9) of the 1938 Code provided:

'(9) Whenever a reduction of employees is made necessary because of a shortage of funds or a material change in duties of organization, employees shall be laid off in inverse order to earned seniority in the class of position in the department affected, and thereafter on the basis of the inverse order of total seniority in excess of an employee with greater class position seniority, he shall be entitled to a position in the next lower class of position in which he last previously served. * * *'

In reviewing the action of an administrative board by certiorari, the court will only determine:

'(1) Whether the board kept within its jurisdiction, (2) whether it acted according to law, (3) whether its action was arbitrary, oppressive, or unreasonable and represented its will and not its judgment, and (4) whether the evidence was such that it might reasonably make the order or determination in question.' ¹

The evidence taken by the commission shows that there...