Gross v. Sandy CA2/6

Filed 2/18/25 Gross v. Sandy CA2/6 NOT TO BE PUBLISHED IN THE OFFICIAL REPORTS California Rules of Court, rule 8.1115(a), prohibits courts and parties from citing or relying on opinions not certified for publication or ordered published, except as specified by rule 8.1115(b). This opinion has not been certified for publication or ordered published for purposes of rule 8.1115.

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION SIX

JAMES GROSS, 2d Civ. No. B333161 (Super. Ct. No. 22CV-0077) Plaintiff and Appellant, (San Luis Obispo County)

v.

MARY VIXIE SANDY, as Executive Director, etc. et al.,

Defendants and Respondents.

James Gross appeals a judgment denying his petition for writ of administrative mandate. (Code Civ. Proc., § 1094.5.)1 We conclude that the trial court’s findings rest upon substantial evidence and affirm. (Fukuda v. City of Angels (1999) 20 Cal.4th 805, 824; County of Alameda v. Board of Retirement (1988) 46 Cal.3d 902, 910.)

1 All statutory references are to the Code of Civil Procedure.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL HISTORY Mary Vixie Sandy, the Executive Director of the Commission on Teaching Credentialing (CTC), filed an accusation against Gross on October 29, 2020. Sandy requested a hearing regarding the matters alleged and then a decision revoking Gross’s “Clear Single Subject Teaching Credential” (Credential) to teach physical education. On October 4 through 8, 2021, an administrative hearing occurred before an administrative law judge (ALJ). All parties were represented by counsel. The ALJ issued a proposed decision which was adopted by the CTC in December 2021. The CTC decision found that Gross was unfit to teach and revoked his Credential due to seven allegations of misconduct. The misconduct concerned acts committed between 2012 and 2017 at two high schools within the Lucia Mar Unified School District. These acts included non-consensual touching of a student wrestler, personal verbal attacks directed at the superintendent and an administrator, and failure to submit a meaningful education plan, among other acts. The CTC decision concluded that the acts were immoral, unprofessional conduct, and involved moral turpitude. The CTC later denied Gross’s petition for reconsideration. On February 15, 2022, Gross filed a verified petition for writ of administrative mandate in the trial court, seeking, among other things, an order commanding the CTC to vacate their decision revoking his Credential. On October 5, 2023, the trial court issued a decision denying Gross’s petition as well as his motion to augment the administrative record. The court’s lengthy and thorough decision discussed these acts of misconduct: