People ex rel. Seery v. Sturgis
Dissenting Opinion
I think the action of the defendant should be affirmed. By section 779 of the charter of 1897 (Laws of 1897, chap. 378) the fire commissioner was authorized to appoint and remove a fire marshal for the boroughs of Manhattan, The Bronx and Richmond, and a fire marshal to be seated in Brooklyn to exercise his powers within the boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens. By the charter of 1901 (Laws of 1901, chap. 466) that section was amended by inserting after the provision authorizing the fire commissioner to
Proceedings annulled and relator reinstated, with fifty dollars costs and disbursements.
Opinion of the Court
It appears by the return to the writ that the relator was appointed a fire marshal on the 10th day of March, 1898, pursuant to the provisions of section 779 of chapter 378 of the Laws of 1897/ By the provisions of that section the fire commissioner was- authorized to appoint and remove a fire marshal for the boroughs of Manhattan,
“The fire commissioner is hereby authorized to appoint and remove a fire marshal for the boroughs of Manhattan, The Bronx and Richmond, and a fire marshal to be seated in Brooklyn and to exercise his powers within the boroughs of Brooklyn and Queens. Said fire marshals shall be members of the uniformed force of the fire department of the city of Hew York, and within such boroughs, respectively, to which they may be assigned, shall have and possess all the powers heretofore conferred by law upon the fire marshal of the corporation heretofore known as the mayor, aldermen and commonalty of the city of New York.”
On January 14, 1902, the fire commissioner notified relator that he proposed to remove him, and allowed the relator an opportunity of making an explanation before taking action, in the premises. Upon such hearing discussion was had between the fire commissioner and the relator, which related mainly to the power of the commissioner to remove the relator summarily, it being the contention of the commissioner that the power of summary removal still existed by virtue of the provisions of section 779, and of the relator that no such power existed, for the reason that the amendment made the relator a member of the uniformed force and that he could only be removed for cause upon charges and after a trial. Following this debate the commissioner issued an order removing the relator from his position, to take effect on the 18th day of January, 1902. Thereafter, and on May sixteenth of the same year, the relator procured to be allowed upon his petition therefor this writ for the purpose of reviewing the action of the commissioner. It cannot be doubted, we think, but that the effect of the amendment of 1901 .was to make the fire marshals members of the Uniformed force of the fire department of the city of Hew York, from and after the date when such amendment took effect. Such is its express language. Being members of the uniformed force they became subject to the obligations which devolved upon them in such relation and entitled to all of the protection which th.e law throws around such members. Section 739 of the revised Greater Hew York charter provides for
The proceedings should, therefore, be annulled and the relator be reinstated in his position as fire marshal, with fifty dollars costs and disbursements.
Van Brunt, P. J., Patterson and Laughlin, JJ., concurred; Ingraham, J., dissented.
Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.