During these challenging times, Severson & Werson remains open and in full operation, consistent with the firm’s previously established contingency planning. While many of our attorneys and staff will be working remotely, as a firm, we continue in full operation. We are here to help, as always.

Administrative Law

Subscribe to California Appellate Tracker

Thank you for your desire to subscribe to Severson & Werson’s Appellate Tracker Weblog. In order to subscribe, you must provide a valid name and e-mail address. This too will be retained on our server. When you push the “subscribe button”, we will send an electronic mail to the address that you provided asking you to confirm your subscription to our Weblog. By pushing the “subscribe button”, you represent and warrant that you are over the age of 18 years old, are the owner/authorized user of that e-mail address, and are entitled to receive e-mails at that address. Our weblog will retain your name and e-mail address on its server, or the server of its web host. However, we won’t share any of this information with anyone except the Firm’s employees and contractors, except under certain extraordinary circumstances described on our Privacy Policy and (About The Consumer Finance Blog/About the Appellate Tracker Weblog) Page. NOTICE AND AGREEMENT REGARDING E-MAILS AND CALLS/TEXT MESSAGES TO LAND-LINE AND WIRELESS TELEPHONES: By providing your contact information and confirming your subscription in response to the initial e-mail that we send you, you agree to receive e-mail messages from Severson & Werson from time-to-time and understand and agree that such messages are or may be sent by means of automated dialing technology. If you have your email forwarded to other electronic media, including text messages and cellular telephone by way of VoIP, internet, social media, or otherwise, you agree to receive my messages in that way. This may result in charges to you. Your agreement and consent also extend to any other agents, affiliates, or entities to whom our communications are forwarded. You agree that you will notify Severson & Werson in writing if you revoke this agreement and that your revocation will not be effective until you notify Severson & Werson in writing. You understand and agree that you will afford Severson & Werson a reasonable time to unsubscribe you from the website, that the ability to do so depends on Severson & Werson’s press of business and access to the weblog, and that you may still receive one or more emails or communications from weblog until we are able to unsubscribe you.

Although procedural fairness does not prohibit the combination of the advocacy and adjudicatory functions within a single administrative agency, tasking the same individual with both roles violates the minimum constitutional standards of due process. The irreconcilable conflict between advocating for the agency on one hand, and being an impartial decisionmaker on the other, presents a particular combination of circumstances creating… Read More

While the scope of a student's right to a fair hearing before discipline is uncertain and evolving, one thing is clear:  the school must follow its own published procedures in determining whether to discipline a student.  Here, the defendant school's procedure said that students would have the right to cross-examine witnesses.  The school misinterpreted this as granting cross-examination only if… Read More

University did not deny male student fair process when it suspended him for two years for unconsented sex with another student without holding a hearing at which the male student could cross-examine the female victim.  Where credibility is crucial, a hearing and cross-examination may be required, but here, the male student's own account of the evening and the female student's… Read More

Contrary to 40 years of appellate authority, this decision holds that when a trial court must exercise its independent judgment in ruling on an administrative mandamus petition under CCP 1094.5 and the administrative agency was required to apply a clear and convincing evidence standard in the administrative proceeding, the trial court cannot affirm based on a preponderance of the evidence… Read More

Plaintiff adequately exhausted her administrative remedies under the FEHA by filing a complaint with the DFEH that nearly correctly named her employer's dba Hooman Chevrolet (instead of Hooman Chevrolet of Culver City) but got the corporate name of the employer wrong Hooman Enterprises, Inc. (instead of NBA Automotive, Inc.).  The administrative complaint also correctly named the plaintiff's supervisor and other… Read More

The department's annual cap on the amount of 1, 3-D pesticide that could be applied within a township was an illegal underground regulation that was not adopted, as it should have been, in compliance with the Administrative Procedure Act.  Even though only one company (Dow Chemical) produced 1,3-D pesticides, the township cap program applied generally to all users of the… Read More

Gov. Code 53069.4 allows local governments to enforce their ordinances through an administrative process for imposing and collecting fines.  Unlike most administrative proceedings that may be reviewed only by a writ of administrative mandamus under CCP 1094.5, a citizen can appeal to the superior court from a decision by that administrative process within 20 days after the decision. (Gov. Code… Read More

A court may abstain from adjudicating a suit that seeks equitable remedies if granting the requested relief would require a trial court to assume the functions of an administrative agency, or to interfere with the functions of an administrative agency.  Here, plaintiff sought injunctive relief against a local water service district to prevent a particular employee from operating its water… Read More

In hospital peer review committee proceedings, a person hired by a hospital to serve as a hearing officer may be disqualified for financial bias under Business and Professions Code section 809.2(b), on grounds that the officer has an incentive to favor the hospital in order to increase the chances of receiving future appointments.  Under the statute, a hearing officer is… Read More

An employee who had complained about his supervisor, was terminated and then claimed retaliation for his whistleblowing was not required to exhuast his administrative remedies before the employer's human relations commission because the commission's decision would have been subject to review and change by the supervisor in consultation with the mayor.  To have the personally involved supervisor (who had been… Read More

1 2 3 5