Cathcart
Citizens Capital Corp. v. Cathcart
Opinion
Lead Opinion
Danielson, J.
Various corporate and individual appellants have appealed from the denial of their petition for writ of mandate to review a decision of the Department of Consumer Affairs on an accusation by the Bureau of Collection and Investigative Services (hereafter the Bureau), finding violations of various sections of the Business and Professions Code.
Procedural Facts
In 1976, Douglas Faigin, chief of the Bureau, signed accusation No. 703 before the Department of Consumer Affairs, against various licensed collection agencies and individuals, charging numerous violations of the Business and Professions Code and Administrative Code governing collection agency practices.
On April 22, 1977, Faigin signed an amended and supplemental accusation charging further violations.
A stay was issued by the superior court prohibiting proceedings on accusation No. 703 (2d Civ. 54172).
On or about February 15, 1978, a new accusation (No. 707) was filed, signed by Ms. Koene Cohen, then chief of the Bureau. Appellants concede in their brief and allege in their writ petition that the new accusation signed by Ms. Cohen was substantially the same as the one signed by Mr. Faigin.