Eashman

Eashman v. City & County of San Francisco

Good Law
179 Cal. App. 2d 782·1960 Cal. App. LEXIS 2295·4 Cal. Rptr. 264
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaApril 18, 1960Civ. No. 18539California1,661 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Paulsen, J.

On January 20, 1948, Willie Eashman, respondent-petitioner, entered the employ of the San Francisco Municipal Railway and later was given the civil service classification “J66 Garageman—Permanent.” That employment continued until April 5, 1957. Shortly after that date petitioner was served with a notice of hearing which stated: “You are charged with inattention to duties in that you were working on your own personal automobile during regular working hours.” Following a hearing before the Manager of Utilities that officer filed an order of dismissal of the accused. This was affirmed by the Civil Service Commission.

Willie Eashman will be referred to here as “Petitioner,” the Civil Service Commission and its officers, collectively, as the “Board,” and the Manager of Utilities as the “Manager.”

After the order of dismissal was affirmed by the board, petitioner instituted this proceeding wherein he sought an alternative writ of mandate compelling the board to restore to him his employment and classification or show cause why it should not be compelled to do so. He admitted that during working hours he “had taken ten or fifteen minutes to change two spark plugs in his own car.” He…

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.