Opinion ID: 1212672
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 5

Heading: Was there an emergency ?

Text: The trial judge, in his able and helpful memorandum opinion, looked for a definition of emergency within the context of § 15-5-112, supra, and recited the following definitions and holdings, which we find acceptable: `Emergency' is defined in Webster's Third International Dictionary as `an unforeseen combination of circumstances or the resulting state that calls for immediate action,' and `a pressing need.' 14 Words and Phrases 434-457 cites scores of cases defining `emergency,' and when the word is applicable, among them being: `An emergency is an unforeseen occurrence or combination of circumstances which calls for immediate action or remedy; a pressing necessity. Whether an emergency exists justifying an appointment by Governor to vacant office is reviewable by courts. State ex rel. Parks v. Tucei, 166 So. 370, 371, 175 Miss. 218.' Words and Phrases, 438. `If a servant can himself do work rendered necessary in unforeseen contingency, there is no emergency authorizing employment of assistant, so as to render assistant a fellow servant. Freemen v. Smit, 75 P.2d 575, 577, 193 Wash. 346.' 14 Words and Phrases, 439. `Where mayor and common council, within six weeks of resolution reducing police force without assigning reason, employed men to replace discharged policemen and it did not appear that emergency existed, dismissal was arbitrary, and hence discharged policemen were entitled to reinstatement ... Glass v. Board of Common Council of City of Frankfort, 90 S.W.2d 700, 703, 262 Ky. 471.' 14 Words and Phrases 422. `Where there had been a shortage of firemen from 1961 and the shortage had been increasing steadily from year to year and in order to make up for the shortage firemen had been working a considerable amount of overtime, fire fighters association's stated threat to boycott voluntary overtime on the part of firemen in 1967 did not permit the city to declare a state of emergency making it mandatory for firemen to work in excess of 60 hours per week. New Orleans Fire Fighters Ass'n Local 632 AFL-CIO v. City of New Orleans, La. App., 204 So.2d 690, 695.' 14 Words and Phrases Supplement 69. The trial court then proceeded to analyze the evidence to determine whether or not there were sufficient facts of record to support the Mayor's and Chief's decision that an emergency existed when Levitt was appointed. The evidence most favorable to the appellees includes the following: Mayor West took office January 1, 1979, but he did not appoint a chief until February, with effective date of March 1, 1979. In the interim, the police department continued to operate without incident under the guidance of a lieutenant in the department. As has been noted, Chief Hawk gave as his reason that an emergency existed the fact that Levitt's qualification and skills I personally know are needed to be implemented immediately to carry out my plans to upgrade the department in general. Even though the Chief indicated that there were no such persons in the department, the record permits of the conclusion that the Chief's inquiry was of a cursory nature  one which did not permit him to knowingly decide that such personnel were not available within the department. A review of the record indicates to us that the Chief could not know whether his problems could or could not have been solved through the utilization of officer personnel from the department because he had not reviewed any of the files of the available policemen. In any event, the Chief's reason for hiring Levitt does not suggest that an emergency existed under any definition of case law cited by the trial judge, and which we have approved, supra. The judge examined exhibits in the form of a report concerning the needs of the Rock Springs Police Department furnished by the Wyoming Law Enforcement Academy and, not finding any recommendations therein contained having to do with emergency matters, responded to this report as follows: ... To the contrary, the report states that the `City of Rock Springs has the nucleus for an efficient police department,' recommends certain areas of improvement, and adds that `it is inevitable that some years may pass before improvements and exceptions will be fully realized,' and that `In every sense the present report is a beginning toward a long range plan of maintaining a police service that is capable of meeting developing needs.' ... The following dialogue took place between the judge and Chief Hawk when the Chief was on the witness stand: THE COURT: But before you declared this alleged emergency, you'd already agreed to hire Mr. Levitt; isn't that correct? THE WITNESS: Yes, sir. THE COURT: The emergency occurred in your mind after Mr. Levitt was already hired? THE WITNESS: Maybe I can explain by saying that I had been guided by Counsel in making that particular decision. THE COURT: I'm talking about this emergency. You determined there was an emergency after you had hired Mr. Levitt. THE WITNESS: After we had offered him employment, yes, sir. Mayor West and the police chief both testified that the reason the emergency was declared was to make Larry Levitt's appointment legal. Without going further, we think that the judge could have found  as he did find  that an emergency did not exist and that the `emergency' was apparently an after-the-fact discovery made only in an attempt to give some legal justification for not complying with the Civil Service rules and for the hiring of Mr. Levitt.