State ex rel. Thurmond v. City of Shreveport

Citations

• 124 La. 178
• 50 So. 3
• 1909 La. LEXIS 451

Syllabus

<p>1. Municipal Corporations (§ 62*) — Defining Duties of Officer — Delegation of-Power.</p> <p>It is a violation of a city charter, confiding to the council the power of defining the duties of the auditor, for the council to attempt to delegate this power to the mayor.</p> <p>2. Municipal Corporations (§ 155*) — Removal of Officers.</p> <p>The provision of a city charter authorizing the council to remove any officer or employs-when his service is no longer necessary to the public interest cannot apply to the auditor, whose office, created by the charter with certain prescribed duties, some of which are essential to the operation of the city government, and which must be performed by him alone, cannot possibly cease to be necessary.</p> <p>3. Mandamus (§ 76*) — Salaries of Officers. —Interference of Court.</p> <p>The court may interpose where a city council, having no power to abolish an office created by the charter, or to remove the officer except for cause, manifestly attempts to do this indirectly, by abuse ot its discretion to fix the-salary of the officer, fixing it so low that no-competent person will accept the office.</p> <p>[Ed. Note. — For other cases, see Mandamus, Cent. Dig. §§ 158-160; Dec. Dig. § 76.*]</p> <p>4.- Municipal Corporations (§ 164*) — Salary of Officers — Interference of Court.</p> <p>A city council empowered, in the exercise of its discretion, to fix- the salary of the city auditor at a sum not exceeding $1,500 per year, having reduced it from $1,500 to $300, in a manifest attempt to abolish the office, which it could not do, or to remove the officer, which it could not do in the absence of cause, will' be ordered to restore it to not less than. $900; the evidence showing that to be the lowest reasonable salary for the office, and any amount above that being a matter of discretion.</p> <p>Nicholls and Monroe, JJ., dissenting.</p>