Herrera v. County of Riverside
Defendants County of Riverside (County) and Riverside County Sheriff’s Department (Department) appeal from a judgment on a petition for writ of administrative mandamus that upheld the decision of the Department to terminate plaintiff Peter Herrera from his employment as a sheriff’s lieutenant but nonetheless awarded Herrera over two years of back pay. Defendants contend: (1) the trial court exceeded its authority when it attempted to fashion a remedy under the Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) that governed relations between defendants and Herrera; (2) the remedy of back pay may not be awarded in the absence of a Skelly[1] violation; and (3) Herrera waived his procedural objections and did not enter the proceedings with clean hands.
Herrera appeals from his termination from employment. Herrera contends: (1) the trial court erred in denying his petition for reinstatement because the due process error in failing to provide a clear statement of reasons in the Notice of Intent (NOI) was never cured by the administrative hearing; (2) the NOI requirement in the MOU is more stringent than the statutory NOI requirement, and relevant decisions of the State Personnel Board uniformly order reinstatement as the remedy for a defective NOI; (3) the remedy the trial court provided is deficient as a matter of law; and (4) the trial court erred in finding that the factual determinations of the Administrative Hearing Officer warranted termination.
We conclude the trial court erred in awarding Herrera back pay. We therefore affirm the trial court’s denial of Herrera’s petition for reinstatement, but we reverse the award of back pay.
Comments on Herrera v. County of Riverside