Hulings

Hulings v. State Department of Health Care Services

Good Law
159 Cal. App. 4th 1114·2008 Cal. App. LEXIS 176·72 Cal. Rptr. 3d 81·27 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 304
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 5, 2008C054145California3,347 words

Opinion

Opinion

Morrison, J.

Alberto Hulings had permanent status as a fraud investigator with the State Department of Health Services (reorganized as the State Department of Health Care Services in 2007), a position designated as a peace officer. He laterally transferred to a position as investigator for the Department of Consumer Affairs, also a peace officer designation. He was rejected on probation from the new position and sought mandatory reinstatement to his former position. Three months after being reinstated, Hulings was told he must undergo a new background investigation to retain his peace officer status. Can the department require a new background investigation upon mandatory reinstatement? We conclude the answer is no.

The State Department of Health Care Services (DHS) appeals from a judgment granting a writ of mandate requiring DHS to reinstate Hulings as a fraud investigator without requiring him to complete a background investigation. DHS contends Government Code section 19140.5, requiring reinstatement to a former position after rejection on probation, does not require reinstatement to the same duties. DHS further contends it must have discretion to determine whether an employee is…

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.