Maxwell v. Civil Serv. Comm'n of S.F.
Before: THE COURT.
Synopsis
Public Officers—San Francisco—Examination by Civil Service Commission—Promotion in Fire Department—Examination by Physical Tests Discretionary.—Under section 4 of article 13 of the charter of the city and county of San Francisco, providing that all applicants for places in the classified civil service shall be subjected to examination, and that such examination shall include, “when appropriate,” tests of physical qualifications, the determination whether physical tests are appropriate in_the case of applicants for promotion in the fire department of the city and county rests in the sound discretion of the civil service commission.
Id.—Assistant Chief Engineers—Classification as Single Office.— Under the provisions of the ehart.er, the civil service commission, for the purpose of providing an eligible list from which to certify the names of persons' to fill vacancies in the offices of first assistant chief engineer and second assistant chief engineer, the examination for which positions were necessarily the same, had discretionary power to include both of such officers'in the same classification for the purposes of an examination for promotion in the fire department from the rank of battalion chief, notwithstanding the salaries attached to such offices varied in amount.
THE COURT.
In this action a demurrer to the complaint was sustained and judgment was thereupon entered for the defendants, from which the plaintiff appeals.
The plaintiff, as a taxpayer of San Francisco, sued to enjoin the civil service commission of the city from holding an examination for promotion in the fire department. The members of the commission are joined as defendants. It is alleged that the commission intends to hold such examination without including as part of it any tests of physical fitness or health of the persons applying to be examined. The claim is that the city charter requires such tests to be made a part of the examination, that the commission is without power or discretion to have such examination held without including these tests, and that it would needlessly and illegally expend the public funds if it did so.
In classifying the civil service of the city and in organizing the fire department, the officers of that -department ranking above superintendents of engines are divided into four classes or ranks, namely: 1. Chief engineer; 2. First assistant chief engineer; 3. Second assistant chief engineer; 4. Battalion
[338]
chiefs. The chief engineer is not selected under the civil service rules. The officers ranking below him must be so selected.
The two offices of first assistant chief engineer and second assistant chief engineer became vacant and notice of that fact was given to the civil service commission. The charter provides that upon receiving notice that a place is vacant, the commission shall certify to the appointing officer the names of one or more persons, not exceeding three, standing highest on the eligible list for the office to be filled, from which persons the appointment to the place shall be made by the appointing officer. (Art. 13, sees. 9 and 10.)
For the purpose of providing an eligible list from which to certify the names of persons to fill the said places, the commission thereupon, as provided in section 6 of article 13 of the charter, gave notice that at a time and place mentioned “an examination for promotion in the fire department from the rank of battalion chief to the rank of assistant chief engineer” would be held by the commission.
More from California Supreme Court
- People v. Wende (1979)
- People v. Watson (1956)
- People v. Superior Court (Romero) (1996)
- People v. Kelly (2006)
- Auto Equity Sales, Inc. v. Superior Court (1962)
- Aguilar v. Atlantic Richfield Co. (2001)
- People v. Lewis (2021)
- In Re Estrada (1965)
- Denham v. Superior Court (1970)
- People v. Marsden (1970)