Case Name: THE STATE ex rel. LABER v. HAWES et al., Appellants
Court: Supreme Court of Missouri
Jurisdiction: Missouri
Decision Date: 1903-11-03
Citations: 177 Mo. 397
Docket Number: 
Parties: THE STATE ex rel. LABER v. HAWES et al., Appellants.
Judges: All ’concur.
Reporter: Missouri Reports
Volume: 177
Pages: 397–398

Head Matter:
THE STATE ex rel. LABER v. HAWES et al., Appellants.
In Banc,
November 3, 1903.
Officer: holdover: removal without cause. Under the police law for St. Louis, a patrolman who has served the term for which he was appointed, and thereafter holds over, can be removed at any time. He is not entitled to another term of four years on the theory thht by being permitted to continue in office after his term expired he was, by implication, reappointed for another term.
Appeal from St. Lonis City Circuit Court. — Ho». S. P. Spencer, Judge.
Reversed.
C. W. Bates and Wm. F. Woerner for appellants.
A. A. Paxson for respondent.

Opinion:
GANTT, J.
This is a proceeding by mandamus for the salary of the relator and five others, as patrolmen. '
They had all fully served their appointed terms, and were simply holdovers when they were removed. The circuit court allowed the claim of Laber from October 17, 1895, to November 1, 1895, at the rate of $83.33 1-3 a month; of P. D. Westervelt from September 15, 1894, to September 23, 1896, and of James W. Young from October 17,1895, to November 1,1897, and denied the claims of the other three, and defendants appealed.
Laber was appointed a regular patrolman on November 1, 1887, for a term of four years and served until October 17, 1895.
"Westervelt was appointed a regular patrolman June 14, 1875, resigned June 14, 1881; was appointed a special June 15, 1884, and was dropped September 15, 1894.
Young was appointed a .patrolman November 1, 1889, for a term of four years, which, he fully served, and held over until October 17, 1895, when he was dropped.
They all claim reappointments by implication. The judgment in their favor was erroneous. [State ex rel. Rife v. Hawes, ante, p. 360.] It is, therefore, reversed, and the writ quashed.
All 'concur.