Deegan

Deegan v. City of Mountain View

Bad Law
1999 Cal. App. LEXIS 473·72 Cal. App. 4th 37·84 Cal. Rptr. 2d 690·99 Daily Journal DAR 4503
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 16, 1999H017366California5,768 words

Opinion

Opinion

Wunderlich, J.

The City of Mountain View (City) appeals from the trial court’s judgment on a writ of administrative mandate brought by Timothy Deegan (Deegan), a terminated water utility worker. After internal appeals, City’s appeals board recommended termination of Deegan’s employment based on a 1994 reckless driving incident, but came to a split decision regarding the discipline to be imposed for earlier rule violations. The trial court found that Deegan had committed the misconduct and that he had violated City’s personnel rules and regulations, but that the disciplinary action taken—termination—had been excessive, constituting an abuse of discretion. City assigns error primarily in the standard of review used by the trial court. For the reasons stated below, we reverse.

Statement of Facts

We are bound by the trial court’s factual findings as long as they are supported by substantial evidence. We indulge every reasonable inference and presumption in favor of the trial court’s findings. (Barber v. Long Beach Civil Service Com. (1996) 45 Cal.App.4th 652, 659-660 [ 53 Cal.Rptr.2d 4 ] (Barber).)

Deegan committed some minor transgressions before the two major incidents which led to his…

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.