Kidd

Kidd v. State of California

Good Law
1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 226·62 Cal. App. 4th 386·72 Cal. Rptr. 2d 758·98 Daily Journal DAR 2789·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 2057
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMarch 20, 1998C009484California7,662 words

Opinion

Opinion

Puglia, J.

The appellants (hereafter plaintiffs) appeal from a judgment on the pleadings in favor of defendants. Plaintiffs challenge an affirmative action program, the State Personnel Board’s policy of “supplemental certification,” which allows certain minority and female applicants for positions in the state civil' service to be considered for employment even though they did not place in the top three ranks of the list of eligible candidates. The named defendants, the State of California (State), the State Personnel Board (Board), and the Department of Fish and Game (Department) (hereafter collectively defendants), argue the case is moot because prior to trial the Board suspended the Department’s use of supplemental certification as a means of increasing minority and female employees within the Department. Plaintiffs argue defendants should not be permitted to avoid an adverse ruling by their eleventh hour rescission of the challenged policy, particularly when the report upon which the Board based its order reserved to the Board the option to reinstitute supplemental certification if the Board finds that circumstances within the Department warrant its resumption.

In our view,…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.