Campbell v. Career Development Institute

Filed 12/13/23 CERTIFIED FOR PUBLICATION

IN THE COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA

SECOND APPELLATE DISTRICT

DIVISION EIGHT

RICARDO CAMPBELL, B320590

Plaintiff and Appellant, Los Angeles County Super. Ct. No. 21STCP00003 v.

CAREER DEVELOPMENT INSTITUTE, INC.,

Defendant and Respondent.

APPEAL from a judgment of the Superior Court of Los Angeles County, Mitchell L. Beckloff, Judge. Vacated and remanded. Kosnett Law Firm and James Victor Kosnett for Plaintiff and Appellant. O’Hagan Meyer, Vickie V. Grasu and Angeli C. Aragon for Defendant and Respondent. ____________________ The Career Development Institute, Inc. dismissed Ricardo Campbell from its vocational nursing program. Campbell brought a writ petition under section 1094.5 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The trial court denied the petition because the

Institute’s own policies did not require it to hold a hearing. Since this ruling, the Supreme Court issued its landmark decision about the doctrine of fair procedure. (Boermeester v. Carry (2023) 15 Cal.5th 72 (Boermeester).) We vacate and remand for the trial court to determine whether the doctrine of fair procedure applies and if so, whether it required the Institute to offer Campbell additional procedure. Undesignated statutory citations are to the Code of Civil Procedure. I The Institute’s student handbook and school catalog outline student discipline procedures. The handbook describes grounds for discipline and states students may appeal dismissals. The catalog describes appeal procedures. These procedures do not require a hearing or some other opportunity for students to be heard before the Institute dismisses them. On September 29, 2020, the Institute’s director of nursing wrote a two-page letter saying the Institute was dismissing Campbell. The letter recounted an incident at Campbell’s clinical placement from earlier that day. Three nurses said Campbell was rude. Campbell said he had merely tripped on a nurse’s foot. Campbell reported the incident to Human Resources at the clinic. The letter said the Institute requires students to report problems to their instructors, not to staff at clinics. Campbell’s actions “placed the school’s continuation with that facility at risk. . . . [T]he decision has been made that Ricardo Campbell will be dismissed . . . effective immediately.” The Institute tells us this was not the first problem it had with Campbell. Its appellate brief describes issues between the Institute and Campbell predating the September 29, 2020