Legal Opinion
Rowell v. City of Battle Creek
Michigan Supreme Court
Decided March 12, 1912No. Docket No. 127PublishedCited by 2 opinions
Error to Calhoun; North, J. Assumpsit by Harriet L. B. Rowell against the city of Battle Creek for salary as police matron. Judgment for plaintiff for less than the amount claimed. Plaintiff brings error.
1Opinion of the CourtStone, J.
The plaintiff was appointed police matron of the defendant city May 14, 1900, which office she still claims to hold by virtue of such appointment. This is a statutory office, created by Act No. 109 of the Public Acts of 1897. A part of section 2 of said act, being section 3492, 1 Comp. Laws, reads as follows:
“The police matron shall not be appointed for any definite term, but shall hold office until removal. She may be removed at any time for cause by the mayor, or, in cities having a police commission, by said commission, or, in county jails where appointed by the sheriff, by said sheriff;…
2Cases cited11 opinions
- State ex rel. Denison v. City of St. LouisSupreme Court of Missouri · 1886
- Hallgren v. CampbellMichigan Supreme Court · 1890
- Board of Street Commissioners v. WilliamsCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1903
- Miles v. StevensonCourt of Appeals of Maryland · 1894
- Field v. CommonwealthSupreme Court of Pennsylvania · 1859
6 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Thompson v. Civil Service Commission of Provo CityUtah Supreme Court · 1943
- Lowrie v. BrennanMichigan Supreme Court · 1937