Smith v. Brown
FRANK SMITH v. JOHN Q. BROWN
Smith v. Brown, 59 Cal. 672 (1881)
Headnotes
Officer—Police Officer—Power of Removal—Constitutional Law.— The plaintiff was appointed a police officer of the City of Sacramento, by the Board of Police Commissioners, and was afterwards removed by them, without written charges or trial and conviction, as required by the sixth section of the Act of March 6, 1872, amendatory of the Act incorporating the City of Sacramento. (Stat. 1871-2, p. 244.) Held: The Board had power to remove him.
Summary
Appeal from a judgment for the defendant in the Superior Court of Sacramento County. Densoh, J.
The proceeding in the Court below was an application for a writ of mandamus to compel the Police Commissioners of the City of Sacramento to permit the plaintiff to hold and enjoy the office of police officer. The affidavit stated that the plaintiff was appointed police officer by the Police Commissioners on the fifth day of April, 1880, and that he was removed on the first day of April, 1881, without cause, and without having had written charges preferred against and served upon him, and without a public or any trial or conviction by the Police Commissioners upon any charges. Judgment was rendered for the defendant upon demurrer.
Syllabus and headnotes are prepared by the reporter or publisher, not the court, and are not part of the opinion.
Opinion of the Court
Text extracted by OCR from a scanned original; check the original for exact wording.
The Court:
On the authority of People v. Hill, 7 Cal. 102 , the judgment is affirmed.
How later courts describe this case
No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.
Cited by 7 cases
View all citing references →Relies on it most ⓘ
Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.