McCoach v. Philadelphia
Citations
- 273 Pa. 317
- 117 A. 71
- 1922 Pa. LEXIS 573
Syllabus
<p>Municipalities — Police officers — Demotion or removal from office — Appointing power — Acts of June 1, 1885, P. D. 87; March 5, 1906, P. L. 94, and June 25, 1919, P. L. 581 — Words and phrases.</p> <p>1. Unless restrained by statute, a city of the first class may promote, demote or discharge a policeman at will, under the rule that the power which appoints may remove.</p> <p>2. The Act of June 25, 1919, P. L. 581, supersedes the acts of June 1, 1885, P. L. 37, and March 5, 1906, P. L. 94, and is the sole guide in matters relating to the removal or demotion of police officers in cities of the first class.</p> <p>3. Under section 16 of article XIX of the Act of 1919, a policeman, being in the classified service, cannot be reduced “because of his political or religious opinion or affiliations.”</p> <p>4. Not decided whether the first paragraph of section 18, of the same article, relates to policemen.</p> <p>5. Par. 2, sec. 18, of the act, providing that no police officer “shall be removed or discharged except for cause upon written charges, and after an opportunity to be heard in his own defense,” does not apply to a reduction in pay or position, and therefore a policeman who has been demoted is not entitled to an “opportunity to be heard in his own defense.”</p> <p>6. If it appears that the cause assigned for the demotion of a policeman was a just cause, not religious or political, and a written statement thereof was given to him, and opportunity allowed him to give a written answer thereto, he cannot complain of the action of the power that appointed him in demoting him.</p> <p>7. The word “removed” will not be construed to signify “reduced” or “demoted,” in view of its popular meaning, and its use in other portions of the act.</p> <p>Appeal — Question not raised in court below — Jurisdiction.</p> <p>8. Where a question goes to the jurisdiction, the appellate court should decide it although it was not raised in the court below.</p> <p>Mr, Justice Kephart dissente
Judges: Fraser, Kephart, Moschzisker, Sadler, Schaffer, Simpson, Walling
Read full opinion on CourtListenerSourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.