Gai

Gai v. City of Selma

Bad Law
1998 Cal. App. LEXIS 1003·68 Cal. App. 4th 213·79 Cal. Rptr. 2d 910·98 Daily Journal DAR 12305·98 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8886
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaDecember 3, 1998F026581California7,757 words

Opinion

Opinion

Thaxter, J.

Statement of the Facts and Case

Appellant Dennis Z. Gai (Gai) was employed as a police officer with the Selma Police Department. On November 8, 1989, Gai was served with “Notice of Intended Disciplinary Action,” proposing his employment as a peace officer be terminated for stated reasons. Gai responded to the notice and on or about December 5, 1989, he was served with notice of termination based on the same charges of misconduct. The termination was effective November 15, 1989.

Gai appealed the decision to terminate his employment to the Selma Personnel Commission (Commission) in accordance with rule XII of the City of Selma’s Personnel Rules and Regulations. The Commission is a body of five persons appointed by the Selma City Council (Council). The Commission is charged with the responsibility of conducting evidentiary hearings on appeals by city employees from disciplinary actions taken against them. Pursuant to ordinance, members of the Commission are appointed by the mayor with the approval of the Council. Each appointment to the Commission is for a term of four years.

On or about January 1, 1990, following the filing of Gai’s appeal to the Commission, but before…

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.