State ex rel. Heffernan v. City of Hoquiam

• Decision Date: 20 April 1936
• Docket Number: 25953.
• Citation: 186 Wash. 50,56 P.2d 1012
• Parties: STATE ex rel. HEFFERNAN v. CITY OF HOQUIAM et al.
• Court: Washington Supreme Court

56 P.2d 1012

186 Wash. 50

STATE ex rel. HEFFERNAN v. CITY OF HOQUIAM et al.

No. 25953.

Supreme Court of Washington

April 20, 1936

Department 1.

Appeal from Superior Court, Grays Harbor County; D. F. Wright Judge.

Action in mandamus by the State of Washington, on the relation of J E. Heffernan, against the City of Hoquiam, a municipal corporation, and another. From a judgment granting a peremptory writ of mandamus, the defendants appeal.

Reversed with direction.

James P. H. Callahan, of Hoquiam, for appellants.

James P. Neal, of Olympia, for respondent.

STEINERT, Justice.

This is an action in mandamus to compel the issuance of city warrants in payment of a balance alleged to be due and owing for services rendered to the city by a police officer. The court made findings of fact and conclusions of law, based upon which judgment was entered granting a peremptory writ of mandamus as prayed for. The city and its clerk have appealed.

The case was tried upon an agreed statement of facts, the substance of which we quote as follows: The appellant city of Hoquiam is a municipal corporation of the second class, and as such is governed by Rem.Rev.Stat. §§ 9006-9089. The elective officers of the city consist of a mayor, twelve councilmen, treasurer, city clerk, and police judge. All other officers of the city are appointed by the mayor subject to confirmation by the city council. No term is fixed for any office of the city, except that of mayor and city councilman. Salaries of all officers are fixed by the city council, subject to a maximum annual figure prescribed by statute for mayor, councilman, treasurer, city clerk, city attorney, and chief of police. The statute provides that the salary or compensation for 'no officer' of such city shall be increased or diminished during his term of office (Rem.Rev.Stat. § 9017). The statute further provides that the police force of such city shall consist of a chief of police and such number of policemen as shall from time to time be fixed and determined by the city council, and that the mayor, with the consent of the council, shall appoint the policemen and all subordinate officers of the city and may, for any cause, remove the same, with the consent of the council (Rem.Rev.Stat. §§ 9029, 9030).

January 12, 1927, Ordinance No. 1216 of the city was passed and approved. The ordinance enumerated the officers and employees of the city, prescribed their duties, and designated the amounts of their respective salaries. The officers included in the police department were a chief of police, sergeant, desk sergeant, and police matron. The chief of police was authorized to appoint such number of policemen as should be provided by the city council, subject to the approval of the mayor and council. The salary of the chief was fixed at $125 per month; that of the sergeant and desk sergeant, respectively, at not to exceed $160 per month; and that of policeman at not to exceed $140 per month. The ordinance further provided that the mayor might, with the consent of the city council, at any time remove any appointive officer of the city.

On or about January 7, 1929, the relator, J. E. Heffernan, was appointed patrolman in the police department, by the mayor, and duly qualified as such. January 6, 1930, the relator was appointed captain of the police department by the same mayor, and his appointment was confirmed by the council. However, Ordinance No. 1216, supra, which was still in effect, did not provide for the office of captain in the police department, nor did relator take an oath of office as captain, although he served in that capacity throughout the year 1930.

In the fall of 1930, the city council adopted a budget for the expenses of the city during the year 1931. In the budget the sum of $1,920 (or $160 per month) was allotted for 'captain of police.'

On January 5, 1931, a new mayor assumed office. Although relator received no formal appointment from the new mayor or from the city council or chief of police at or after that time, he nevertheless continued to serve as captain of police throughout the year 1931.

During the first four months of 1931, relator received, monthly, a warrant for $160, as provided in the recent budget. In the meantime, however, it had been found that the outstanding taxes and estimated receipts from other sources would not be sufficient to meet the current expenses. Accordingly, on April 13, 1931, the city council passed Ordinance No. 1409, effective May 1, 1931, fixing the compensation to be paid the various officers and employees of the city, consolidating certain positions for purposes of economy, and repealing all ordinances and parts of ordinances in conflict therewith. That ordinance provided that the captain of police should receive a salary of $144 per month. The ordinance further contained a section providing that each officer and employee of the city whose salary had been reduced should be required, monthly, upon delivery of his salary or wage warrant, to sign a statement fully releasing the city from any or all claims; and that upon his refusal to so sign, his employment should cease. During the remainder of 1931, the relator, serving as captain of police, received each month a warrant for $144, the reduced amount, and at the same time signed the required release. The reduction, it will be observed, amounted to $16 per month, or a total of $128 during the year 1931.

Thereafter, on October 5, 1931, the city council passed Ordinance No. 1412, again fixing the compensation to be paid the various officers and employees of the city. By that ordinance, the salary of captain of police was fixed at not to exceed $144 per month. Shortly thereafter, the budget for 1932 was made up and approved by ordinance. The budget allowed the sum of $1,728 (or $144 per month) for captain of police. Relator continued to serve as captain after January 1, 1932, but without any formal appointment or further qualification.

During the first four months of 1932, relator received each month a warrant in the sum of $144 and signed the required release. Faced with a similar condition respecting receipts and current expenses, despite the previous reduction in salaries, the city council, on April 25, 1932, passed another ordinance, No. 1421, effective May 1, 1932, fixing the compensation of officers and employees, and repealing all ordinances in conflict therewith. By that ordinance, the salary of captain of police was fixed at not to exceed $122.40 per month. At the same time, Ordinance No. 1422 was passed, readjusting the budget for 1932 in accordance with the provisions of Ordinance No. 1421.

From May 1 to December 31, 1932, relator received a warrant for $122.40 each month. This resulted in a reduction of $21.60 per month for eight months, or a total of $172.80.

In October, 1932, the budget for 1933 was made up and approved by ordinance. The budget allowed the sum of $1,468.80 (or $122.40 per month) for captain of police, which position relator continued to hold, under a third mayor, during the year 1933, but without any formal appointment or further qualification.

For the month of January, 1933, relator received a warrant for $122.40. Faced with a continuing depression and the apparent inability to meet the current expenses provided in the budget, out of the possible receipts, despite the two reductions in salaries already made, the council determined to make a further reduction to conform to the income of the city. Accordingly, on January 30, 1933, the mayor and council adopted Resolution No. 547, appropriating fixed amounts for the various departments of the city for the remainder of the year...