 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
City of Laurel6/21/2005
e either be reversed and remanded or held in abeyance and an order issued to the Commission to make specific findings of fact as we required in Bowie v. City of Jackson Police Department, 816 So. 2d 1012, 1018 ( ) (MisS.Ct. App. 2002). As the record now stands, we have nothing to review because the Commission made no findings of fact. Therefore, I respectfully dissent.
. The majority cites the proper standard and correct parameters of the Commission's powers when conducting an investigation of a person discharged by an appointing power, such as the City. However, it seems to me that the majority opinion ignores the fact that the Commission either overstepped its powers or applied an improper standard in rendering its decision.
. The majority focuses only on the appellate standard of review of the Commission's decision. In my judgment, we should first focus on whether the Commission exceeded its powers in conducting its investigation or whether it used an improper standard in arriving at its decision. If it exceeded its powers, then what it found or held is irrelevant. Likewise, if it used an improper standard, then its decision must be reversed for application of the proper standard.
. As the majority correctly notes, the Commission is "confined to a determination of the question of whether such disciplinary action was or was not made for political or religious reasons and was or was not made in good faith for cause." Miss. Code Ann. ยง 21-31-23 (Rev. 2001).
. After such investigation the commission may, if in its estimation the evidence is conclusive, affirm the disciplinary action, or if it shall find that the disciplinary action was made for political or religious reasons, or was not made in good faith for cause, shall order the immediate reinstatement or reemployment of such person in the office, place, position, or employment from which such person was removed, suspended, demoted, discharged or combination thereof. . . .
Id. (emphasis added). It is clear from the statute that the Commission lacks the power to make its ultimate factual determination without applying the good-faith analysis to the City's actions.
. The majority opinion also focuses on whether there was substantial evidence to support the Commission's ruling to reinstate Brewer. Although I agree that we review the decision of the Commission to determine if there is substantial evidence to support it, the Commission, however, in making its decision, must follow the dictates of the statute which authorizes it to act. We are not required to give deference to a Commission's finding when that finding was not in accordance with the legal standard imposed upon the Commission.
. I begin my analysis by quoting the following order entered by the Commission:
A full investigative hearing was conducted before the Civil Service Commission of the City of Laurel, Mississippi on June 19th, and June 24th, 2002, regarding the appeal to reinstate Mark Brewer to the position of police officer for the City of Laurel Police. Following said hearing, the Commission entered into executive session to deliberate the evidence presented and reach a decision. After through review, the Commission concluded that Mark Brewer was terminated without proper cause.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the termination of Mark Brewer be lifted and that the City of Laurel re-instates him effective immediately with full pay and benefits.
SO ORDERED this 24th, day of June, 2002.
Tony Wheat, Chairman, Civil Service Commission, Ward 2
. The crux of my argument on this first point centers around the following sentence in t
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 Mississippi Personal Injury Attorneys
Personal Injury Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Personal Injury Lawyers in your area.
|
|