Neily

Neily v. Manhattan Beach Unified School District

Good Law
120 Cal. Rptr. 3d 857·192 Cal. App. 4th 187·2011 Cal. App. LEXIS 92·31 I.E.R. Cas. (BNA) 1659
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaJanuary 27, 2011No. B221102California3,934 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Bigelow, J.

A former school district employee filed a petition for writ of traditional mandate (Code Civ. Proc., § 1085) to compel the district to reinstate him as a high school baseball coach. The primary issue in this case is whether the district had a mandatory duty under the Education Code to classify the petitioner as a “probationary” employee and not, as it did, as a “temporary” employee. The issue interests the parties because a “probationary” employee is afforded more employment protections under the code than is a “temporary” employee. The trial court ruled that the district had properly classified the petitioner as a temporary employee, and denied his petition. We affirm.

FACTS

In January 2002, the Manhattan Beach Unified School District (the District) hired Michael Neily, a “certificated” teacher, as the varsity baseball coach at Mira Costa High School (MCHS). Beginning in January 2003, the District employed Neily as a full-time teacher in addition to his duties as MCHS’s baseball coach. In June 2004, the District relieved Neily of his duties as a full-time teacher, but continued his employment as the baseball coach at MCHS. On June 15, 2009, MCHS’s principal, Julie…

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.