Preview:

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF IOWA No. 1-939 / 11-0514 Filed December 21, 2011

DONALD T. ROSDAIL, Petitioner-Appellant, vs. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION OF CEDAR RAPIDS, IOWA, Respondent-Appellee. ________________________________________________________________

Appeal from the Iowa District Court for Linn County, Marsha Beckelman, Judge.

A police officer brought action challenging the city civil service commission's decision discharging him. The district court upheld the discharge, and the police officer appeals. AFFIRMED.

William H. Roemerman of Crawford, Sullivan, Read & Roemerman, P.C., Cedar Rapids, for appellant. Mohammad H. Sheronick, Cedar Rapids, for appellee.

Considered by Danilson, P.J., and Tabor and Mullins, JJ.

2 DANILSON, P.J. A police officer, Donald Rosdail, brought an action challenging the Cedar Rapids Civil Service Commission's affirmance of his August 21, 2007 discharge for misconduct detrimental to the public service. The district court upheld the discharge following a trial de novo. Upon our review, we affirm as the sanction of termination was appropriate in light of Rosdail's misconduct and abuse of his position. On appeal, Rosdail contends the district court erred in finding: (1) he was guilty of nonfelonious misconduct in office in connection with the Lunde investigation (defined by Iowa Code section 721.2(4) as "knowingly . . . by color of the person's office and in excess of authority . . . require[d] any person to do anything or refrain from doing any lawful thing"); (2) he violated department rule 2-1, which requires honesty; (3) he had been insubordinate; and (4) he violated a general order requiring property receipts. Rosdail also contends the court erred in imposing the sanction of discharge. He asks he be reinstated, and if this court rejects some of his arguments, impose a sanction short of discharge. Review of the decision of the civil service commission under Iowa Code section 400.27 is a trial anew in the district court, limited to the specification of charges made to the commission pursuant to section 400.22.1 Mahaffey v. Civil Serv. Comm'n, 350 N.W.2d 184, 187 (Iowa 1984). The trial de novo . . . "normally permit[s] the district court to select [from] the same remedies that were available before the commission." "Throughout the trial court and appellate court proceedings, the commission has the burden of showing that the
1

All references are to the code in effect at the time of dischargethe 2007 Iowa

Code.

3 discharge was statutorily permissible," and we give no weight to or presumption in favor of the commission's determination. Lewis v. Civil Serv. Comm'n, 776 N.W.2d 859, 864 (Iowa 2010) (citations omitted). We review de novo the decision by the district court. Iowa Code

Download DONALD T. ROSDAIL, Petitioner-Appellant, vs. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION OF CEDAR R

Iowa Law