Derrick v. City of Vallejo

California Court of Appeal Jan 21, 1935 No. Civ. 5195Published

Before: Thompson

AI Brief

AI-generated · verify before citing

Holding. A public officer who retains their office and holds themselves in readiness to perform their duties is entitled to their fixed salary, even if the city council forces them to take an unpaid leave of absence without cause.

Issues

Whether a public officer is entitled to compensation while retained in office but forced to take an unpaid leave of absence without cause.
Whether the power to remove an officer at will includes the power to suspend them without pay without cause.

Disposition. affirmed

Quotations verified verbatim against the opinion

“It is a well-established rule of law that the right to compensation attaches to a public office as an incident to the title to the office and not to the mere exercise of the functions thereof.”

“an officer who has been suspended without cause is entitled to his compensation while he retains his office.”

“the plaintiff was never relieved of his office during the period of time which is involved in this action, but, on the contrary, that he was merely granted a leave of absence, the court properly held that he was entitled to compensation”

THOMPSON, J.

The City of Vallejo has appealed from a judgment which was rendered in favor of the plaintiff for the fixed salary to which he was entitled as poundmaster during a period of. time in which, by a resolution of the city, he was forced to take a vacation, or refrain from performing his duties as such officer.

[26]

The cause was heard on stipulated facts. The City of Vallejo operates under a charter. (Stats. 1911, p. 1958.) Pursuant to the charter an ordinance was adopted creating the office of poundmaster and authorizing the city council to appoint that officer. The ordinance authorizing the appointment provides that “The Poundmaster shall be appointed by the Council and shall hold office at its pleasure. ’ ’ The resolution employing him reads as follows: “Be it resolved . . . that F. W. Derrick be and he is hereby appointed Poundmaster of the City of Vallejo, said appointment to date from December 1st, 1918.” He was placed under bond in the sum of $1,000. His salary was definitely fixed at $150 per month. Prior to December, 1932, the plaintiff was appointed, qualified and served as pound-master of Vallejo for some time at a fixed salary of $150 a month. There was ample money in the fund from which his salary was payable for the satisfying of that obligation during the fiscal year which is involved in this suit. The faithful performance of the plaintiff’s official duties during his incumbency is not questioned. On December 21, 1932, “without the request or consent of the plaintiff”, the following resolution was adopted by the city council: “Be it resolved . . . that a leave of absence for Ninety (90) days, without pay, from December 26, 1932, be, and the same is hereby granted to P. W. Derrick, Poundmaster, during which time he is hereby relieved from all duties in connection with the office of Poundmaster of the City of Vallejo.” The plaintiff was not again permitted to resume the performance of his official duties. The plaintiff was not relieved of his office. He was merely granted a temporary “leave of absence”. March 23, 1933, the office of pound-master was abolished. The plaintiff thereafter presented his claim to the City of Vallejo for the fixed salary to which he was entitled during the period of time he held the office of poundmaster without being permitted to perform the duties of that office by virtue of the enforced vacation. The claim amounted to $545. This claim was rejected. Suit was thereupon commenced against the city to recover that sum. Upon the foregoing facts the court adopted findings favorable to the plaintiff and rendered judgment accordingly. Prom that judgment the city has appealed.

Derrick v. City of Vallejo

AI Brief

THOMPSON, J.

More from California Court of Appeal

Related research

AI Brief