Case Name: The People ex rel. Albert E. Westlotorn, Relator, v. Charles F. MacLean et al., Com'rs., Resp'ts
Court: New York Supreme Court, General Term
Jurisdiction: New York
Decision Date: 1891-06-26
Citations: 39 N.Y. St. Rep. 429
Docket Number: 
Parties: The People ex rel. Albert E. Westlotorn, Relator, v. Charles F. MacLean et al., Com’rs., Resp’ts.
Judges: 
Reporter: New York State Reporter
Volume: 39
Pages: 429–430

Head Matter:
The People ex rel. Albert E. Westlotorn, Relator, v. Charles F. MacLean et al., Com’rs., Resp’ts.
(Supreme Court, General Term, First Department,
Filed June 26, 1891.)
Municipal corporations—Discharge op policeman—Certiorari.
The relator, a policeman, was charged with making an unprovoked assault on S., arresting him and falsely charging him with disorderly conduct. The charge was fully established. The testimony of the relator was improbable. Held, that the dismissal of the relator by the police commissioners would not be disturbed by certiorari.
Certiorari to review the proceedings of the police commissioners dismissing the relator from the police force.
Louis J. Grant, for relator; W. H. Clark, corporation counsel (John J. Delany and Cornelius F. Collins, of counsel), for resp't

Opinion:
Barrett, J.
—The relator, a member of the police force, was charged with conduct unbecoming an officer. The specifications were that "the said patrolman Albert E. Westlotorn did, on the evening of June 28, 1890, at about 11.50 o'clock, at the corner of Spring and Hudson street, without cause or provocation, assault Daniel J. Sullivan, shove him into the street, at the same time •striking him a violent blow on the head with his club, arrested him and falsely charged him with disorderly conduct"
The charge and specifications were fully' established -by the complainant Daniel J. Sullivan, and his testimony was corroborated by a large number of witnesses. We have examined the testimony with care and are quite satisfied that the judgment of the commissioners was entirely just. It is rare that so unprovoked and brutal an assault as that disclosed by the record is brought to the attention of the court, and it is difficult to perceive upon what theory this appeal was taken. The testimony adduced by the relator before the commissioners was most improbable, and the preponderance of evidence was decidedly against him. The appeal is without merit, and the writ should be dismissed, with costs.
Van Brunt, P. J., and Patterson, J., concur.