Summary
This Connecticut Appellate Court decision addresses whether a former police chief’s administrative appeal of his dismissal was properly filed against the correct defendant. The court held that under General Statutes § 7-278, the plaintiff was required to name and serve the town council as the authority with the power of dismissal, rather than the town itself. Because the plaintiff failed to comply with this statutory requirement, the appellate court affirmed the trial court’s dismissal of the appeal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction without reaching the alternative mootness argument.
Topics
Practice areas
Questions Presented
- Whether the trial court lacked subject‑matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff named the wrong party under § 7‑278.
Holdings
- The trial court lacked subject‑matter jurisdiction because the plaintiff failed to name and serve the Town Council, the authority having power of dismissal required by § 7‑278; therefore the dismissal of the appeal was proper.
Key quotations
“The failure to name a statutorily mandated, necessary party in the citation is a jurisdictional defect which renders the administrative appeal subject to dismissal.” (at 5)
“A statutory right to appeal may be taken advantage of only by strict compliance with the statutory provisions by which it is created. Such provisions are mandatory, and, if not complied with, the appeal is subject to dismissal.” (at 6)
Factual background
James L. Cetran served as chief of police for the Town of Wethersfield under a retirement agreement requiring written notice to the Town Manager and Town Council. After rescinding his retirement notice, the town council recommended his dismissal for breach of the agreement. Cetran filed an administrative appeal titled “Appeal” naming only the Town of Wethersfield, not the council, as defendant.
Procedural history
The plaintiff, chief of police, was dismissed by the Wethersfield Town Council under § 7‑278. He filed an administrative appeal naming the Town of Wethersfield as the sole defendant. The trial court dismissed the appeal for lack of subject‑matter jurisdiction, holding the town council was the proper party. The plaintiff appealed to this court.