Opinion ID: 1581311
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 1

Heading: Relative to police matrons the municipal code provides, among many other things, as follows:

Text: NATURE OF WORK. This is routine work supervising female prisoners and maintaining order in the women's quarters of the city jail. An employee in this class is responsible for the welfare and safe custody of all female prisoners and internees in the care of the police department.    ILLUSTRATIVE EXAMPLES OF WORK. Books and searches female prisoners. Acts as jailer in the women's quarters of the city jail, maintaining discipline and orderly conduct among the female prisoners.    Prepares female prisoners for and escorts them to show-up, fingerprinting and questioning, arraignment, and trial.    DESIRABLE KNOWLEDGES, ABILITIES and SKILLS. Working knowledge of the methods used in controlling and caring for persons held under police custody, or ability to learn quickly and apply such methods and techniques.    Good physical condition and health with freedom from serious physical defects as indicated by a physical examination. The evidence was uncontroverted that plaintiff had some heart disease and that it developed during her employment in the police department. There was not a scintilla of evidence that her physical condition was such as to qualify her for work as a police matron or do the things required by the municipal code. Dr. Smith, the heart specialist, examining plaintiff for defendant board, found 51% whole man disability. No one has suggested that a woman with 51% disability is in any condition to handle drunken, disturbed or resentful female prisoners. No one claims that she was in good physical condition and health with freedom from serious physical defects   , as outlined by the municipal code. It should be kept in mind that plaintiff was a police matron. She was not employed in a calm or sedentary position. To show that she was disabled as a police matron it was not necessary that she be disabled from all activity. A heart condition may disable a police officer. City of Iowa City v. White, 253 Iowa 41, 111 N.W. 2d 266. Dr. Kelsey did not feel that plaintiff was incapacitated for further performance of duty. He did not say what duty. His examination was on July 14. Plaintiff had already stopped working. The doctor recommended that plaintiff be retired from active duty on July 24. That was only 10 days after examination. Dr. Kelsey thought plaintiff should be retired but was not in sympathy with a disability retirement. For the answer to that problem we must look to the statute. The uncontroverted evidence showed plaintiff suffered from heart disease. She no longer possessed the qualifications for police matron outlined by the municipal code. She was disabled for duty as police matron. Her disability developed during her 25 years of service with the police department. She retired and everyone thought she should.