Thomas v. Kern

• Decision Date: 11 April 1939
• Citation: 20 N.E.2d 738,280 N.Y. 236
• Parties: THOMAS v. KERN, et al., Municipal Civil Service Commission. GROBISEN v. SAME. BRESS v. SAME.
• Court: New York Court of Appeals Court of Appeals

280 N.Y. 236

20 N.E.2d 738

THOMAS

v.KERN, et al., Municipal Civil Service Commission.

GROBISEN

v.SAME.

BRESS

v.SAME.

Court of Appeals of New York.

April 11, 1939.

Proceedings in the matter of the applications of Alfred J. Thomas, Jacob Grobisen, and Samuel Bress against Paul J. Kern and others, as the Municipal Civil Service Commission of the City of New York. From orders of the Appellate Division of the Supreme Court entered February 10, 1939, -- App.Div. --, 10 N.Y.S.2d 409, unanimously affirming, in so far as appealed from, orders of the Special Term granting in part the applications by petitioners, the defendants appeal by permission.

Orders reversed. Appeals from Supreme Court, Appellate Division, First department.

William C. Chanler, Corp. Counsel, of New York City (Jeremiah M. Evarts and Paxton Blair, both of New York City, of counsel), for appellants.

Albert de Roode, of New York City, for respondent Alfred J. Thomas.

Thomas Bress, of New York City, for respondents Jacob Grobisen and Samuel Bress.

James H. Tully, of New York City, for Patrolmen's Benevolent Association of the City of New York, amicus curiae.

Leopold V. Rossi, of New York City, for Civil Service Forum, amicus curiae.

FINCH, Judge.

In this proceeding the Municipal Civil Service Commission has been enjoined from certain acts in connection with the holding of a proposed examination for policemen.

There are three principal questions presented for decision as follows: (1) Whether the provision of a credit for educational training in relevant fields was so arbitrary and unreasonable as to be without the sphere of the proper exercise of judgment by the Municipal Civil Service Commission; (2) a similar query with reference to a credit for organized athletic training; and (3) whether the fixing of a maximum age limit of twenty-nine years for the list of special patrolmen violated section 25-a of the Civil Service Law (Consol.Laws, c. 7).

Facts sufficient to indicate briefly the grounds for the decision are as follows:

This proceeding seeks to cancel the notice of examination published by the Commission on December 1, 1938, from which examination it was intended to promulgate three lists: Patrolmen P. D., Patrolmen P. D., Special List, and Special Patrolmen.

The rating will be on a percentile basis. The 3,600 candidates having the highest marks in this written test will stand in the order of comparative rating. Such test will have a weight of .7. This first examination will be designed to weigh the essential qualifications of aptitude, common sense, initiative, intelligence, judgment and reasoning ability. Still maintaining the procedure of anonymous rating of the candidates, credit on a competitive basis will be added, not exceeding .04 of the weight of the mental test of .7 or .028 of the total weight, to the mental average of each successful candidate because of formal education of college grade in a relevant field at an institution accredited by the University of the State of New York. This credit will not affect the passing mark and will be awarded only to the 3,600, and then on a uniform basis for chemistry, engineering, law, languages, physics, social work, sociology and other relevant courses. The 3,600 will likewise receive competitive credit for a physical test, which will have a weight of .3. Credit not to exceed .04 of the weight of the physical test, or a total of .012 of the total weight, will be added competitively for disciplined formal athletic training in amateur, college or professional athletics of an organized character. Out of the 3,600, the 1,200 candidates who receive the highest final average will, in the order of competitive rating, constitute the eligible list of Patrolmen P. D. The 1,200 who receive the next highest final general average will, in the order of competitive rating, constitute the eligible list of Special Patrolmen for the Board of Water Supply, Board of Transportation, etc. Persons appointed from this Special Patrolmen List will not be eligible for transfer to the Police Department. Those of the 3,600 who score eighty per cent or better on the mental test will be added to the first 1,200 and together they will constitute an eligible list of Patrolmen P. D., Special List. For this third list there will be a waiver of height, weight and physical requirements. Their rank will be in the order of their mental scores.

In providing a credit for educational training or for organized athletic training in relevant fields, has the Municipal Civil Service Commission gone outside the proper field for the exercise of judgment by an administrative body? We think not. All are agreed that in order to maintain law, order and adequate protection for society against modern, organized criminals in the cities of the country, and particularly in the city of New York, the Police Department needs a personnel as able as it is possible to obtain. It is conceded in the brief of petitioner that the candidate with college training ‘has an advantage in equipment.’ In this attempt to meet the needs of the present, the examination seeks to apply competitively two areas of competence and equipment for the position in the form of a credit for training in education in relevant fields and in organized athletics. The credit in education is not given for a college degree, but for training in education in subjects important in the work of the Police Department, and is added after and only provided the mental test has been passed successfully. The maximum credit which can be...