Case Name: The People of the State of New York ex rel. John A. Donnelly, Relator, v. Frank Moss and Others, Composing the Board of Police Commissioners of the Police Department of the City of New York, Respondents
Court: New York Supreme Court, Appellate Division
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1900-04
Citations: 50 A.D. 308
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People of the State of New York ex rel. John A. Donnelly, Relator, v. Frank Moss and Others, Composing the Board of Police Commissioners of the Police Department of the City of New York, Respondents.
Judges: 
Reporter: Appellate Division Reports
Volume: 50
Pages: 308–311

Head Matter:
The People of the State of New York ex rel. John A. Donnelly, Relator, v. Frank Moss and Others, Composing the Board of Police Commissioners of the Police Department of the City of New York, Respondents.
The statement by a member of a police force to his superior “ You lie” is a good ground of dismissal.
Evidence that a member oí the police force of the city of New York, upon his trial before a police commissioner on a charge of neglect of duty, interrupted the testimony of a superior officer by saying to him, “ You lie,” justifies his dismissal, although he attempts to explain his conduct by stating that the witness swore falsely and that his temper became uncontrollable.
O’Brien and Ingraham, JJ., dissented.
Certiorari issued out of the Supreme Court and attested on the 2d day of July, 1897, directed to Frank Moss and others, composing the hoard of police commissioners of the police department of the city of New York, requiring them to certify and return to the office of the clerk of the county of New York all and singular their proceedings had in relation to the removal of the relator from his position as a member of the police force of the city of New York.
Jacob Rouss, for the relator.
Terence Farley, for the respondents.

Opinion:
McLaughlin, J.:
The relator, a member of the police force of the city of New York, was tried and found guilty of two charges: (1) Neglect of duty. (2) Conduct unbecoming an officer. The specification of the first charge was that he was absent from his post during his tour of patrol duty, and the second was that when he was being tried for the first, and while his superior officer was testifying, he interrupted the proceeding by saying to his superior officer, "You lie." ITe was found guilty of both charges and dismissed from the force. Whatever view may be entertained as to the first charge, we do not see how there can be any doubt as to the second.
The relator admitted that he was guilty of the second charge, and we are unable to see, in view of that admission, how the conclusion of the commissioners can be seriously questioned. The admission of the relator was — and I quote from the record — " The complaint was wrong, he swore falsely, and my temper became uncontrollable, and I told him he lied ; and I told the truth."
The efficiency of the police force depends, in no small degree, upon the discipline maintained, and there can be no such thing as. discipline if an inferior officer is permitted, in a judicial proceeding, to say to his superior officer, "You lie." We also think that an officer who has no better control of his temper than this is not a fit person to be intrusted with the protection of property and persons. An officer, in a judicial proceeding, who will so far forget himself as to interrupt the progress of the same by publicly declaring that his superior officer is a liar, is better out of the force than in it.
For these reasons the writ should be dismissed and the proceedings affirmed, with costs:
Van Brunt, P. J., and Patterson, J., concurred; O'Brien and Ingraham, JJ., dissented.