Hunter v. LA CIVIL SERVICE COMM.

124 Cal.Rptr.2d 924 (2002) 102 Cal.App.4th 191 Thomas HUNTER, Plaintiff and Respondent,

v.

LOS ANGELES CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION, Defendant,

County of Los Angeles, et al., Real Parties in Interest and Appellants.

No. B153508. Court of Appeal, Second District, Division Four.

September 19, 2002. Rehearing Denied October 2, 2002. Review Denied December 11, 2002. Liebert, Cassidy, Whitmore, Debra L. Bray, Los Angeles, and Mark Meyerhoff, San Pedro, for Real Parties in Interest and Appellants.

No appearance for Defendant.

Green & Shinee and Helen L. Schwab, Encino, for Plaintiff and Respondent.

EPSTEIN, Acting P.J.

This is an appeal from a judgment ordering the Los Angeles County Civil Service Commission (Commission) to exercise jurisdiction over an appeal from a denial of promotion pursuant to the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights (Gov. Code, § 3300 et seq.).[1] We conclude the Commission lacks jurisdiction to hear and decide the appeal. We therefore reverse the judgment.

FACTUAL AND PROCEDURAL SUMMARY

Thomas Hunter was employed as a Senior District Attorney Investigator with the Bureau of Investigations in the Los Angeles County District Attorney's Office. As [925] such, he is a public safety officer within the definition of the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights. (§ 3301; Pen. Code, § 830.1, subd. (a).)

In April 2000, Hunter tested for the position of Supervising Investigator. He placed in Band 1, and for several months he served as an Acting Supervising Investigator. When promotions to Supervising Investigator were made from the eligibility list, he was not promoted.

Hunter filed an appeal with the Los Angeles County Civil Service Commission, claiming the denial of promotion was on grounds other than merit, and requesting a full evidentiary hearing pursuant to section 3304, subdivision (b) (hereafter section 3304(b)). That section provides: "No punitive action, nor denial of promotion on grounds other than merit, shall be undertaken by any public agency against any public safety officer who has successfully completed the probationary period that may be required by his or her employing agency without providing the public safety officer with an opportunity for administrative appeal."