Haney

Haney v. City of Los Angeles

Good Law
109 Cal. App. 4th 1·134 Cal. Rptr. 2d 411·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 763·2003 Daily Journal DAR 5521·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 4336
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaMay 22, 2003B153530California4,171 words

Opinion

Opinion

Spencer, J.

Introduction

A Los Angeles Police Department (LAPD) Board of Rights found appellant Bryan Haney guilty of absenting himself from his duty post without authorization and submitting a daily field activities report, which he knew, or should have known, contained false information, on May 25, 1998. A majority of the three-person board recommended that appellant be removed from duty as a police officer. The chief of police accepted the recommendation and terminated appellant’s employment. Appellant petitioned for administrative mandamus. The court denied his petition to compel the City of Los Angeles and its chief of police to reinstate him as a police officer. On appeal, appellant contends the charges against him are barred by the statute of limitations or, if not, the penalty of discharge denotes an abuse of administrative discretion. Inasmuch as we find no merit in appellant’s contentions, we affirm the judgment.

Background

On Memorial Day, May 25, 1998, at appellant’s suggestion, he and Officers Stephen Morris, Perry Alvarez and Toni Di Paolo celebrated with a barbecue. Following the Harbor Division’s 10:15 morning roll call, the officers purchased food for the…

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.