California Codes

Cal. Education Code § 87735 (2026)

Termination of Services and Reduction in Force

✓ leginfo export of Sept. 26, 2026 (applied Oct. 1, 2026)
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section CA-LEGleginfo.legislature.ca.gov JustiaCode on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Upon the filing of written charges, duly signed and verified by the person filing them with the governing board of a community college district, or upon a written statement of charges formulated by the governing board, charging a permanent employee of the district with immoral conduct, conviction of a felony or of any crime involving moral turpitude, with incompetency due to mental disability, or with willful refusal to perform regular assignments without reasonable cause, as prescribed by reasonable rules and regulations of the employing district, the governing board may, if it deems such action necessary, immediately suspend the employee from his or her duties and give notice to him or her of his or her suspension, and that 30 days after service of the notice, he or she will be dismissed, unless he or she demands a hearing.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 3 cases (2 in the last 5 years), 1993–2025 · leading case: West Valley-Mission Cmty. Coll. Dist. v. Concepcion, 16 Cal. App. 4th 1766 (Cal. Ct. App. 1993).
West Valley-Mission Cmty. Coll. Dist. v. Concepcion, 16 Cal. App. 4th 1766 (Cal. Ct. App. 1993). “District is authorized to place on compulsory leave of absence employees who have been charged with certain sex or narcotics offenses.”
Johnson v. Fliger, No. 24-6008 (9th Cir. July 14, 2025). “Johnson’s challenge to Cal. Educ. Code § 87735 , which authorizes discipline of employees who violate “rules and regulations of the employing district” that Johnson does not identify, fails for the same reasons.”
Johnson v. Fliger, No. 24-6008 (9th Cir. Aug. 22, 2025). “Johnson’s challenge to Cal. Educ. Code § 87735 , which authorizes discipline of employees who violate “rules and regulations of the employing district” that Johnson does not identify, fails for the same reasons.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.