McMahon v. Bd. of Trustees 7/3/02 CA2/2

SUPREME COURT CASES

Laws-info.com » Cases » California » Court of Appeal » 2002 » McMahon v. Bd. of Trustees 7/3/02 CA2/2

State: California

Court: 1st District Court of Appeal 1st District Court of Appeal

Docket No: B150910

Case Date: 09/26/2002

Preview:Filed 7/3/02

NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS
California Rules of Court, rule 977(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 977(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 977.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT DIVISION TWO BRIAN J. MCMAHON, Plaintiff and Appellant, v. BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE EL CAMINO COMMUNITY COLLEGE DISTRICT, Defendant and Respondent. B150910 (Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. BS047821 )

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County. Dzintra Janavs, Judge. Reversed with directions. Brian J. McMahon, in pro. per., for Plaintiff and Appellant. Liebert Cassidy Whitmore and Mary L. Dowell for Defendant and Respondent. _________________________

Brian J. McMahon (appellant) appeals the trial court's denial of his writ of mandate challenging the decision of the Board of Trustees of the El Camino Community College District (the District) to dismiss him from his tenured faculty position due to evident unfitness for service. Appellant contends that he was denied due process pursuant to Skelly v. State Personnel Bd. (1975) 15 Cal.3d 194, 215 (Skelly). Appellant is correct. On that basis, we reverse. The trial court shall issue a peremptory writ of mandate directing the District to set aside its decision to dismiss appellant. PROCEDURAL AND FACTUAL HISTORY On November 18, 1996, the District's president recommended that its board of trustees dismiss appellant due to "dishonesty, evident unfitness for service, and persistent violation of District regulations."1 The District served appellant with a letter that stated: "You are notified that you are dismissed from employment with the El Camino Community College District effective ninety days from November 18, 1996. Unless a written request for a hearing signed by you or on your behalf is delivered or mailed to the El Camino Community College District within thirty (30) days of the date of the Statement of Decision was personally served on you, the El Camino Community College District will make your dismissal effective without a hearing. The request for a hearing may be made by delivering or mailing the enclosed form entitled Notice of Objection to Decision, or by delivering or mailing a notice of defense as provided by Section 11506 of the Government Code to President Thomas J. Fallo, El Camino Community College District[.]" The District also served appellant with a statement of decision to dismiss and

Education Code section 44932, subdivision (a) provides: "No permanent employee shall be dismissed except for one or more of the following causes: [

Download McMahon v. Bd. of Trustees 7/3/02 CA2/2.pdf