Ey

Ey v. Fitts

Good Law
112 Cal. App. 109·1931 Cal. App. LEXIS 1007·296 P. 327
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaFebruary 20, 1931Docket No. 7266.California1,222 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Thompson, J.

The petitioner sought a writ of mandate in the superior court to compel the respondent Buron Fitts as district attorney of Los Angeles County to reinstate petitioner as a deputy district attorney, the respondent Sam J. Chappel, as secretary of the civil service commission of Los Angeles County, to certify his name to the pay-roll as a deputy district attorney, and the respondent Payne as auditor of Los Angeles County to issue a warrant for petitioner’s salary covering the period since January 15, 1929. The writ was denied and this is an appeal from that judgment.

The appellant contends that this appeal is different from and not governed by the case of Fee v. Fitts, 108 Cal. App. 551 [ 291 Pac. 889 ], However, the only point presented by him in his opening brief, and we quote it verbatim, is as follows: “The authority to remove an employee in the classified service is vested by the Constitution of the state of California, the charter of the county of Los Angeles and county ordinance No. 929, new series, in the Board of Supervisors only.” This argument was directly determined against appellant in the case mentioned and we can see no useful purpose to be served by a repetition…

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.