Case Title: State Ex Rel. Pair v. Burroughs

Citation: 487 So. 2d 220

Docket Number: 56834

State: mississippi

Court: Mississippi Supreme Court

Date: 1986-04-16T00:00:00Z

Document:
487 So. 2d 220 (1986) STATE of Mississippi ex rel. Charles PAIR v. Robert BURROUGHS, Edith East, Frank Therrell, Luella Newsome and Dr. Charles Hollingshead, Trustees. No. 56834. Supreme Court of Mississippi. April 16, 1986. *221 Thomas T. Buchanan, Laurel, for appellant. Franklin C. McKenzie, Laurel, for appellees. En Banc. SULLIVAN, Justice, for the Court: On July 17, 1985, Charles Pair filed an action in the nature of quo warranto against Robert Burroughs, Edith East, Frank Therrell, Luella Newsome, and Dr. Charles Hollingshead, trustees of Jones County Community Hospital. Pair claimed that he was a duly appointed trustee of the Hospital, that the present board unlawfully refused to recognize him and his office, and that he had been removed from office under the auspices of a legislative act that was in violation of § 90, subsection (o), of Art. IV of the Mississippi Constitution of 1890. The Circuit Court, Second Judicial District of Jones County, Mississippi, found against Pair and entered a summary judgment for the Board of Trustees. Pair appeals and assigns two errors: I. That the Trial Court committed reversible error in not holding that the amendment to Section 41-13-29, subsection 3, of the Mississippi Code of 1972, found in Senate Bill 2599, was not unconstitutional for the reason that said Section is in violation *222 of Article 4, Section 90 of the Mississippi Constitution and other Constitutional provisions; and II. That the Trial Court committed reversible error in not recognizing that Section 10 of Senate Bill 2599 specifically states that Senate Bill No. 2599 shall not affect or alter previous appointments to the office of Trustee of the Community Hospital of Jones County. The office of trustee for community hospitals has existed since Mississippi Code Annotated § 7129-55 (1942). That statute provided that a board of trustees consisting of not less than five nor more than seven members shall be appointed by the county board of supervisors to maintain and operate the community hospital in the county. Mississippi Code Annotated § 41-13-29 (Supp. 1983), provided that there would be eleven members on the board of trustees and set out the following method of appointment: It was under this statute that Pair was appointed a member of the board of trustees of Jones County Community Hospital on February 21, 1984. Pair was appointed to a county-at-large position for a term of four years, which term was to expire on February 21, 1988. In 1985, the Mississippi Legislature enacted Senate Bill No. 2599 which became Chapter 511, Laws of Mississippi, 1985. Chapter 511 has an effective date of July 1, 1985. Pursuant to Chapter 511, Mississippi Code Annotated § 41-13-29(3)(c) now provides: Thus the eleven-member board was abolished and replaced by a seven-member board. Under the new act, the Jones County Board of Supervisors appointed seven new members to the board of trustees, with an effective date of July 1, 1985. When the new board met on July 16, 1985, the board refused to recognize Pair as a trustee. The trial court correctly found that Mississippi Code Annotated § 41-13-29(2) contained a grandfather clause preserving the term of office for trustees serving on July 1, 1982. Pair was not a trustee on that date and, therefore, was not protected from the operation of the new statute. The trial court went on to find that the new statute had many laudable purposes other than to remove Pair as a trustee, although the statute had that effect. Pair's primary argument is that § 41-13-29(3)(c) by which he was removed from the office of trustee, is local and private legislation affecting only Jones County and, therefore, is in violation of the Constitution. The case of Lovorn v. Hathorn, 365 So. 2d 947 (Miss. 1978), cert. den. 441 U.S. 946, 99 S. Ct. 2167, 60 L. Ed. 2d 1049 (1979), occasioned the opportunity for this Court to set out the definition of local and private legislation and of general law as follows: 365 So. 2d at 949. There can be no doubt that we are here faced with local and private legislation. The three main constitutional sections dealing with local and private legislation are Art. IV §§ 87, 89, and 90. Mississippi Constitution Art. IV, § 90, states, in pertinent part, "The Legislature shall not pass local, private, or special laws in any of the following enumerated cases, but such matters shall be provided for only by general laws, viz: (o) creating, increasing, or decreasing the fees, salary, or emoluments of any public office." The office of trustee for community hospitals is a public office, and, as such, Art. IV § 90(o) is applicable to this case. Mississippi Constitution Art. IV § 89 provides: Since the local and private legislation in the case sub judice contravenes § 90, § 89 will not apply. Mississippi Constitution Art. IV § 87, states: In the case of Rolph v. Board of Trustees of Forrest County General Hospital, 346 So. 2d 377 (Miss. 1977), this Court, basing their decision on § 87, held invalid local and private legislation allowing the Board of Trustees at the Forrest County General Hospital to waive its immunity from suit in those cases that the board determined to have merit. The Court stated its position thusly: 346 So. 2d at 379. As the careful reader will note, Rolph, supra, has been overruled by Pruett v. City of Rosedale, 421 So. 2d 1046 (Miss. 1982), since the Court applied Mississippi Code Annotated § 41-13-37 (1972) as a type of governmental immunity. Nevertheless, we cite Rolph for the § 87 concept, since this was not the basis of the overruling. Consequently, as is the situation in this case, when local and private legislation does not satisfy the requirements of Art. IV, § 89, or bears no rational relationship to the limited classification, the legislation must be held invalid. See Wilson v. Jones County Board of Supervisors, 342 So. 2d 1293 (Miss. 1977); Smith v. Transcontinental Gas Pipeline Corp., 310 So. 2d 281 (Miss. 1975). There are, however, some situations in which this Court will not interfere with local and private legislation. As stated in In Re Validation of $7,800,000 Combined Utility System Revenue Bond, Gautier Utility District, Jackson County, Mississippi, Dated as of the Date of Delivery. B.L. White, et al., v. Gautier Utility District of Jackson County, 465 So. 2d 1003 (Miss. 1985): 465 So. 2d at 1016. As will be seen below, there are major differences between the general legislation *225 dealing with the appointment of trustees for community hospitals, and the local and private appointment process that it limited to Jones County. As such, the above-quoted law will not apply in the case sub judice. The case of Quinn v. Branning, 404 So. 2d 1018 (Miss. 1981), set out the method for determining the constitutionality of a statute, when our Court stated: 404 So. 2d at 1020. If we follow the theory of Quinn v. Branning, and strike only that part of § 41-13-29(3)(c) stating, "Any hospital erected, owned, maintained and operated by any county having two (2) judicial districts, which is traversed by U.S. Interstate Highway 59, which intersects Highway 84 therein, ..." as unconstitutional, and, at the same time, allow the remainder of (3)(c) to stay in effect, we will have created a substantial anomaly. This is true because the remainder of section (3)(c) provides for a specific scheme of appointment for community hospital trustees. This scheme, however, is different from the general scheme of appointing trustees stated in Mississippi Code Annotated § 41-13-29(2) (Supp. 1985). The differences are: Therefore, allowing the remaining portion of § 41-13-29(3)(c) to stand would create two general schemes of appointment of trustees, and it would become unclear which scheme should be used, as the two are different. Obviously, by enacting (3)(c) the legislature was limiting that section to Jones County, and applying that appointment scheme only to Jones County. Furthermore, that part of the statute referring to highways 59 and 84 bears no rational relationship to the means of appointing the trustees. We find, as a result, that the legislature has provided two schemes for the appointment of trustees; one as a general law for the state of Mississippi and one as a law that applies only in Jones County, Mississippi. Such a procedure is forbidden by our constitution and, therefore, we declare that § 41-13-29(3)(c) in its entirety is void as in violation of the constitution. This declaration offers no comfort to Mr. Pair. His argument that he was appointed to an at-large position under § 41-13-29(2) is without merit. We find that since Pair was appointed pursuant to Mississippi Code Annotated § 41-13-29(3)(c) (Supp. 1983) which contained the prohibitive "highway" language his appointment was not valid. Pair's next argument that Mississippi Constitution, Art. III, § 20, and Art. VI, § 175, have been violated as he was removed from public office, is without merit. Johnston v. Reeves and Co., 112 Miss. 227, 72 So. 925 (1916), is dispositive of this *226 argument. That case stands for two propositions that apply directly to the facts of this case. First, a public office is not a contract and an encumbent has no vested interest in the terms, fees or emoluments thereof. Second, the office of member of the board of trustees of the Jones County Community Hospital or any other community hospital created by an act of the legislature is a legislative office and not a constitutional one. This being true, the legislature has the unquestioned right at any time to prescribe the duties of this office or to curtail the power. Indeed, the legislature may abolish the office altogether. The first assignment of error, while meritorious in one regard, does nothing to restore Mr. Pair's office as trustee. Section 10 of Chapter 511, Laws, 1985, provides as follows: See MCA § 41-13-29 (Supp. 1985), (Editors' notes) Pair argues that this section clearly and unambiguously states that Chapter 511 shall not restrict any rights conferred on board of trustees. Pair asserts that the failure of the lower court to acknowledge Section 10 violates the rule espoused in McCaffrey's Food Market, Inc. v. Mississippi Milk Com'n, 227 So. 2d 459 (Miss. 1969). In McCaffrey's, supra, this Court, speaking of the construction of statutes, stated, 227 So. 2d at 463. The appellees also cite McCaffrey's, and then attempt to consider the statute as a whole. Looking at Chapter 511, we note that Section 2 is the source of MCA § 41-13-10 (Supp. 1985). § 41-13-10, entitled Definitions, states in part, Clearly, owners and boards of trustees are separate and distinct. Owners are either county boards of supervisors, or governing councils of a municipality. According to MCA § 41-13-29 (Supp. 1985), owners appoint boards of trustees. Again, the portion of Chapter 511, section 10, dealing with boards of trustees says that the provisions of Chapter 511 shall not restrict any authority, powers, rights or privileges conferred on the board of trustees by former legislation. It seems clear that the language in section 10 refers not to the terms of the individual members, but to the board itself and its overall authority in policy making decisions with respect to community hospitals. This becomes clearer upon viewing § 41-13-29(2), which provides that a trustee holding office on July 1, 1982, will not be affected by this provision. Thus, since section 2 provides that only certain trustees positions would continue, it becomes apparent that section 10 does not refer to the office tenure itself. Pair is not included in the group contained in 41-13-29(2). Furthermore, when closely construing § 41-13-29(3)(c), it should be noted that there are very specific procedures and terms of office for appointing the board. When taking all of this into consideration, it seems more than clear that section 10 was not meant to save every office of trustee until expiration. Accordingly, this assignment of error is without merit. In conclusion, § 41-13-29(3)(c) is declared unconstitutional, and it is ordered that the Jones County Board of Supervisors hereby appoint Trustees to the Jones County Community Hospital pursuant to Mississippi Code Annotated § 41-13-29(2) (Supp. 1985). In all other particulars, the judgment of the Circuit Court of Jones County, Mississippi, in granting summary judgment for the appellees is affirmed. MISSISSIPPI CODE ANNOTATED § 41-13-29(3)(c) (SUPP. 1985) DECLARED UNCONSTITUTIONAL; SUMMARY JUDGMENT FOR APPELLEES AFFIRMED. PATTERSON, C.J., WALKER and ROY NOBLE LEE, P.JJ., and HAWKINS, DAN M. LEE, PRATHER, ROBERTSON and ANDERSON, JJ., concur.