Cimarusti

Cimarusti v. Superior Court

Good Law
79 Cal. App. 4th 799·94 Cal. Rptr. 2d 336
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 26, 2000B136762California3,569 words

Opinion

Opinion

Vogel, J.

Introduction

Petitioners, Don T. Cimarusti, Larry A. Coon, Mark A. Saavedra, and John M. Saffold were youth correctional officers employed by the Department of the Youth Authority. Each petitioner received a notice of adverse action informing him that he was dismissed for engaging in or observing and failing to stop or report the use of unauthorized physical force on six wards in the custody of the Youth Authority and housed in the Nixon Cottage at the Fred C. Nelles Youth Correctional Facility. Petitioners appealed the adverse actions, and the matter is now pending before the State Personnel Board.

Petitioners requested discovery of certain evidence for potential use at the administrative hearing. Government Code section 19574.1 provides in pertinent part, “(a) An employee who has been served with notice of adverse action [or the employee’s representative] shall have the right to inspect any documents in the possession of, or under the control of, the appointing power which are relevant to the adverse action taken or which would constitute ‘relevant evidence’ as defined in Section 210 of the Evidence Code. The employee, or the designated representative, shall also have…

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.