TaiLexi AI U.S. Case Law

City of Tacoma v. Civil Service Board

The City of Tacoma, Respondent, v. the Civil Service Board of Tacoma, Respondent, Victor W. Kowalski, Appellant

City of Tacoma v. Civil Serv. Bd., 518 P.2d 249 (Wash. Ct. App. 1973)
Download
Format
Include

Star paging (*137) is kept for pin cites.

Court
Court of Appeals of Washington · State Appellate Courts
Decided
December 19, 1973
Docket
No. 1001-2
Judges
Petrie
Citations
518 P.2d 24910 Wash. App. 2491973 Wash. App. LEXIS 1108

Opinion — Petrie

Petrie, J.

In a prior opinion of this court involving the same parties hereto (Tacoma v. Civil Serv. Bd., 6 Wn. App. 600 , 494 P.2d 1380 (1972)), we decided that the Civil Service Board of Tacoma did not have jurisdiction to entertain an appeal by an employee of the City of Tacoma who alleged that he had been arbitrarily demoted to his former position during a period of probationary service in a position of higher rank. After remittitur, the employee, Officer Kowalski, attempted by motion to invoke the inherent jurisdiction of the superior court to resolve the issues which had been submitted originally to the Civil Service Board. The court denied Officer Kowalski’s motion. This appeal followed.

The superior courts of this state possess constitutionally granted and inherent power to review illegal or manifestly arbitrary and capricious nonjudicial administrative acts of public officials or agencies which are violative of fundamental rights.

State ex rel. DuPont-Fort Lewis School Dist. 7 v. Bruno, 62 Wn.2d 790 , 384 P.2d 608 (1963). The issue presented by this appeal resolves, therefore, into a question of whether or not any fundamental right of a public employee has been violated when he is employed under a civil service system and, after having been promoted and temporarily placed in a position of higher rank for a probationary period, he is returned during that probationary period to his permanent classification without having been notified of any specific reason therefor.

To posit the question in that manner is to answer it. The fundamental right of a public employee under a civil service structure is enforcement, by judicial decree, if necessary, of those portions of the civil service act applicable *251 to him in any given factual circumstance. We find no provision of Tacoma’s Civil Service Ordinance or Board Rules implementing the ordinance, nor has any been directed to us, which requires the head of a department, when notifying an employee that he is being returned to a position in his former classification during his probationary period, to also notify the employee of any reasons for such action. Accordingly, the action of Officer Kowalski’s department head did not violate any fundamental right to which Officer Kowalski was entitled.

The superior court had no jurisdiction to review the action taken by the officials of the City of Tacoma in this matter. Judgment is therefore affirmed.

Pearson, C.J., and Armstrong, J., concur.

How later courts describe this case

No later court has written an explanatory parenthetical about this case yet.

1975: 21977: 11978: 11979: 11981: 11982: 11983: 119752026peak 1975 · 2

Relies on it most ⓘ

  1. Pierce County Sheriff v. Civil Service Commission658 P.2d 648 (Wash. 1983)
  2. Williams v. Seattle School District No. 1643 P.2d 426 (Wash. 1982)
  3. Wilson v. Nord597 P.2d 914 (Wash. Ct. App. 1979)
  4. Lane v. Ocosta School District No. 172537 P.2d 1052 (Wash. Ct. App. 1975)
  5. Hough v. Washington State Personnel Board626 P.2d 1017 (Wash. Ct. App. 1981)
  6. Mattox v. Washington State Board Against Discrimination535 P.2d 470 (Wash. Ct. App. 1975)

Most recent

  1. Pierce County Sheriff v. Civil Service Commission658 P.2d 648 (Wash. 1983)
  2. Williams v. Seattle School District No. 1643 P.2d 426 (Wash. 1982)
  3. Hough v. Washington State Personnel Board626 P.2d 1017 (Wash. Ct. App. 1981)
  4. Wilson v. Nord597 P.2d 914 (Wash. Ct. App. 1979)
  5. Green v. Cowlitz County Civil Service Commission577 P.2d 141 (Wash. Ct. App. 1978)
  6. Smith v. City of Houston552 S.W.2d 945 (Tex. App. 1977)

Citing references are not a citator: they show that a later opinion cites this case, not whether it followed, distinguished, or overruled it. Check negative history before relying on this case.

Authorities cited 2

DepthCaseCited by
State ex rel. DuPont-Fort Lewis Sch. Dist. No. 7 v. Bruno, 384 P.2d 608 (Wash. 1963) 18
City of Tacoma v. Civil Serv. Bd., 494 P.2d 1380 (Wash. Ct. App. 1972) 8

Keyboard shortcuts

/Focus the search box
j kNext / previous result
EnterOpen the selected result
xAdd / remove the selected result from the download list
n pNext / previous search term in a case
cCopy the citation of the current case
+ −Larger / smaller reading text
?Show this list