Court Opinion

ID: 9825753
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 14:04:04.94661+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:41:21.032919
License: Public Domain

Mehaeey, J., on Rehearing. Appellee calls our attention to the fact that the salary question was raised in the original case and discussed, hut that the court did not pass on it. In this the appellee is correct, and the only question raised in his petition for rehearing is this one. The rules under which Collins was working provide, \ among other things: “The appointing authority, after; notice in writing to an employee stating’ specific reasons therefor, may dismiss an employee who is negligent, ’ ’ etc.; It is also provided that after notice the appointing authority may suspend an employee. Notice, of course, is required to be given so that the employee may have a hearing’ and that he may present any defense he may have. In this case the notice was not given and Collins really had no opportunity to have a hearing and present his defense until he appealed to the Merit System Council. “It is thoroughly settled that where an officer does not hold at pleasure, but holds during good behavior or subject to removal for specific causes, then before he can be removed, there must be notice and a hearing given to him.” Lucas v. Futrall, 84 Ark. 540, 106 S. W. 667; Mechem's Public Officer, § 454; 23 Amer. & Eng. Enc. of Law 437, 438; State v. Hixon, 27 Ark. 398; Lee v. Huff, 61 Ark. 494, 33 S. W. 846. This court has uniformly held that where an employee or officer holds subject to removal for specified causes, and where notice and hearing are required, there must be the notice and hearing before the discharge. After he appealed to the Merit System Council, Collins had a hearing and the council approved the finding of the commission and ordered that his dismissal be permanent. This order of the council was treated as taking effect on October 8th, when it should have been held to be effective on December 10th. We are, therefore, of opinion that until there was notice and hearing, Collins was entitled to his salary; that his dismissal did not become effective until the finding of the council, and ho should have his salary up to that time. Since the judgment in this case has been reversed and writ dismissed, the cause is remanded to the circuit court with directions to ascertain the amount of salary for the period herein indicated, and to give judgment therefor.