Jackson v. City of Los Angeles

Good Law
111 Cal. App. 4th 899·2003 Cal. App. LEXIS 1329·2003 Daily Journal DAR 9872·4 Cal. Rptr. 3d 325·2003 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 7885
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaAugust 28, 2003B159850California4,064 words

Opinion

Opinion

Kitching, J.

I. INTRODUCTION

This appeal presents the issue whether Government Code section 3304, subdivision (d) in the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act (§ 3300 et seq., the Bill of Rights Act) establishes the statute of limitations in a charter city’s action to discharge a police officer, or whether, under home rule provisions applicable to charter cities in article XI, section 5 of the California Constitution, the city charter establishes the statute of limitations. We conclude that because section 3304, subdivision (d) addresses a matter of statewide interest, it prevails over the city charter’s limitations provision. We hold that section 3304, subdivision (d), as implemented by the police department’s own administrative order, establishes the statute of limitations. Because the facts show that section 3304, subdivision (d) barred the city’s administrative complaint, we reverse a judgment denying appellant’s petition for writ of mandate.

H. STANDARD OF REVIEW

Discipline imposed on city employees affects their fundamental vested right in employment. (McMillen v. Civil Service Com. (1992) 6 Cal.App.4th 125, 129 [ 8 Cal.Rptr.2d 548 ]; Schmitt v. City of Rialto…

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.