Lynch v. Superior Court

Opinion

TAYLOR, J.

Real party, Richard F. Verbrugge, was, prior to June 6, 1968, employed as senior narcotic agent with the State Department of Justice. He was assigned to the San Francisco office of the Bureau of Narcotic Enforcement. Effective June 6, 1968, he was dismissed from his position by the department, and the State Personnel Board affirmed his dismissal-and denied a rehearing.

Having exhausted his administrative remedies, Verbrugge sought judicial review of the decision of the State Personnel Board by means of a mandamus proceeding filed in the Superior Court of Santa Cruz County, pursuant to the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure section 1094.5. Petitioners’ motion for a change of venue to the Superior Court of the State of California, in and for the City and County of San Francisco, on the ground that Verbrugge’s cause of action arose in San Francisco within the meaning of Code of Civil Procedure section 393, subdivision (l)(b), was denied, and petitioners then filed a petition for a writ of mandate with this court, pursuant to section 400 of the Code of Civil Procedure, requesting the transfer. We have concluded that the writ should be granted.

Venue in a mandamus action brought under Code of Civil Pro

[931]

cedure section 1094.5 is governed by Code of Civil Procedure section 393, subdivision (1)(b).

(Duval

v.

Contractors State License Board

(1954) 125 Cal.App.2d 532, 535 [271 P.2d 194].) Code of Civil Procedure section 393, subdivision (1)(b), in pertinent part, provides: “1) Subject to the power of the court to transfer actions and proceedings as provided in this title, the county

in which the cause, or some part thereof, arose,

is the proper county for the trial of the following actions: . . .

“(b) Against a public officer or person especially appointed to execute Ms duties, for an act done by Mm in virtue of his office; or against a person who, by Ms command or in his aid, does anything toucMng the duties of such officer.” (Italics added.)