Seifert v. Cal.State Personnel Bd.
Following an administrative hearing during which petitioner and appellant Matthew Seifert challenged his employment discharge as a California Highway Patrol (CHP) officer, the California State Personnel Board (Board) affirmed Seiferts discharge. Seifert filed a petition for writ of mandamus in the trial court challenging the Boards affirmance of the CHPs termination of Seifert. After a hearing on Seiferts writ petition, the trial court dismissed Matthew Seiferts writ petition and entered judgment in favor of the CHP (the real party in interest) and the Board. Seifert appeals the judgment denying his petition for writ of mandate seeking to reverse his discharge. Seifert contends his discharge constituted an excessive penalty, and therefore this court should overrule the trial courts denial of his writ petition and remand the matter to the trial court for issuance of a writ of mandate compelling the Board to impose a lesser penalty. Court conclude termination of Seiferts employment was not a grossly excessive penalty. Seifert was caught falsely reporting over a two-year period his sick leave as vacation time and tampering with CHP computer records and the sergeants log. Such conduct reflected a propensity for dishonesty warranting Seiferts dismissal. There being no abuse of discretion in the Board upholding Seiferts discharge, Court affirm the judgment.
Comments on Seifert v. Cal.State Personnel Bd.