Opinion

State ex rel. Hughes v. Board of Com'rs of Port of New Orleans

  • 150 La. 1
  • 90 So. 419
  • 1922 La. LEXIS 2365
Court
Supreme Court of Louisiana
Filed
Jan 2, 1922
Status
Published
Author
Niebb
On the bench
Dawkins, Niebb
Cited by
6 cases
Authority
More cited than 93.3%

The opinion

O’NIEBB, J.

Defendant appeals from a judgment making a writ of mandamus peremptory, commanding defendant to reinstate the relators in the positions or employment from which they were discharged, and commanding defendant to pay relators’ salaries from the time they were discharged.

Relators wore employed as clerks in the shipping or traffic department of the public *3 cotton warehouse controlled by the defendant board. They had been examined and had qualified under the civil service rules of the board, in conformity with the Act 15 of the Extra Session of 1915.

The statute created a board of examiners for the examination of all applicants for employment in any warehouse or other establishment in aid of commerce controlled by the board of commissioners of the port of New Orleans, excepting persons to be employed as watchmen, patrolmen, firemen, and unskilled laborers at salaries less than $75 per month, and excepting also samplers, weighers, and inspectors of cotton. The relators in this case are not excepted from the provisions of the statute. The statute declares that all persons other than those appointed on the recommendation of the board of examiners may be removed by and at the pleasure of the board of commissioners of the port of New Orleans; and it declares that all persons appointed or employed as a result of an examination by the board of examiners “shall hold their offices or employment during their good behavior, and shall only be removed on charges preferred against them to said board of commissioners, and which shall be proven contradictorily against them to the satisfaction of said board.” Section 5.

The only reason for the discharge of the relators in this case was that their services were no longer needed. They were therefore discharged merely for the purpose of economy. However inconvenient and expensive it may be for the board of commissioners to have to obey the civil service law under some circumstances, the law must be obeyed under all circumstances.

The judgment is affirmed, at appellant’s cost.

This is a copy of a public record, reproduced as it was published. It is not legal advice, and it may not be the version a court would rely on. Check the official source before you cite it.

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.