administrative Spanner v

Table of Forms

Authoritative Dictionary

Thesaurus

						iLaw Dictionary			USAConstitution Law
						California			BankruptcyCode.US
						Law Dictionary			iBusiness Center.US
						Administrative Law Discretion			United States Law.US

US Codes

State Codes

Evidence

Law Students-USL

News

Entertainment

Medical Dictionaries

A Legal and Business Portal-Home
A Legal and Business Portal-Home

iLaw Dictionary
California
Law Dictionary
Administrative Law Discretion
(Spanner v. Rancho Santiago Comm. College)

Administrative Law-Discretion-Appeal-Writ-
(Spanner v. Rancho Santiago Comm. College)

Spanner has a fundamental, vested right in his permanent employment; thus, he is entitled to the protection of the due process clauses of the federal and state Constitutions. (Skelly v. State Personnel Board (1975) 15 Cal.3d 194, 207.) In a disciplinary hearing, due process includes “notice of the proposed action, the reasons therefor, a copy of the charges and materials upon which the action is based, and the right to respond, either orally or in writing, to the authority initially imposing discipline.” (Id. at p. 215.) Spanner does not dispute that all these safeguards were provided to him. There was no denial of due process.

Although the trial court is required to reweigh the evidence supporting the finding of misconduct, it may not exercise its independent judgment when reviewing the penalty. “When the superior court has conducted its review and has concluded that the agency properly found misconduct, the imposition of the appropriate penalty for that misconduct is left to the sound discretion of the agency. ‘The penalty imposed by an administrative body will not be disturbed in mandamus proceedings unless an abuse of discretion is demonstrated.’ [Citation.]” (Kazensky v. City of Merced (1998) 65 Cal.App.4th 44, 53.) An appellate court must sustain the trial court’s findings of misconduct if they are supported by substantial evidence, and it will not disturb the penalty imposed “‘unless it is shown to have been a manifest abuse of discretion.’ [Citation.]” (Id. at p. 54.) “[A]dministrative boards and officers . . . are vested with a high discretion and its abuse must appear very clearly before the courts will interfere.” (Talmo v. Civil Service Com. (1991) 231 Cal.App.3d 210, 230, internal quotations omitted.)

Spanner v. Rancho Santiago Comm. College-G032636-5/18/04-un 17 2004-CA4/3

Jun 17 2004

G032636
[PDF] [DOC]

Spanner v. Rancho Santiago Comm. College Dist. 5/18/04 CA4/3