Thanks for visiting! Welcome to a new way to research case law. You are viewing a free summary from Descrybe.ai. For citation and good law / bad law checking, legal issue analysis, and other advanced tools, explore our Legal Research Toolkit — not free, but close.
Brennan v. Byrne
Citations: 157 A.2d 303; 31 N.J. 333; 1960 N.J. LEXIS 232
Court: Supreme Court of New Jersey; January 11, 1960; New Jersey; State Supreme Court
Cyril P. Brennan, the plaintiff-appellant, challenged the dismissal of his complaint by the Law Division regarding his employment as a county investigator, which he claimed should be protected under N.J.S.A. 38:16-1 due to his status as a veteran. His appointment was made by Essex County Prosecutor Webb on July 15, 1955, and was later terminated by Brendan T. Byrne, the current prosecutor. Brennan's complaint, filed on March 16, 1959, sought reinstatement with back pay. The Law Division, led by Judge Coolahan, ruled that Brennan's position was at the pleasure of the prosecutor and could be terminated without cause, referencing N.J.S. 2A:157-10. This statute, along with earlier legislative enactments, established that county investigators serve at the discretion of the prosecutor and are excluded from civil service protections. The 1931 legislation allowed county prosecutors to appoint investigators, highlighting their ability to hire based on personal knowledge and confidence. Subsequent laws recognized veterans' eligibility for positions as county detectives, but the 1951 revision reaffirmed that county investigators serve at the prosecutor's discretion without tenure protections, leading to the dismissal of Brennan's complaint. In 1952, New Jersey's Legislature enacted a law (L. 1952, c. 79) allowing veterans employed as county investigators to be eligible for appointment as county detectives after specified service periods, but without guaranteeing tenure as county investigators. This legislative intent is consistent across various acts, starting from the Veterans' Tenure Act of 1907, indicating a desire to keep county investigators in an unclassified service, removable at the county prosecutor's discretion. The 1931 and 1933 laws explicitly excluded county investigators from tenure protection under the Civil Service Act, while allowing veterans to hold positions as county detectives with such protection. The comprehensive revision in 1951 reaffirmed this exclusion, ensuring county investigators remained under the prosecutor's authority for hiring and removal. Court rulings, including Cetrulo v. Byrne and Miele v. Allan, supported the idea that specific legislative enactments could override the general protections of the Veterans' Tenure Act, reflecting a legislative intent to grant supervisory roles broad discretion over employment decisions. The opinion contrasts general tenure acts with specific statutes regarding under-sheriffs, asserting that the latter, being more detailed, take precedence over the former in cases of conflict. The relator's reliance on general tenure statutes is deemed insufficient. Citing Townsend v. Boughner, the court notes that an office held at another's pleasure lacks a fixed term under the tenure act. However, Townsend did not address situations involving statutory provisions that allow removal outside earlier tenure statutes. The court concludes that the Law Division correctly rejected the plaintiff's tenure claim based on the specific legislative intent of the relevant enactment. The judgment is affirmed with concurrence from Chief Justice WEINTRAUB and Justices JACOBS, FRANCIS, PROCTOR, HALL, and SCHETTINO, with no justices dissenting.