An employee who, after investigation and trial by civil service commission, is found guilty of inefficiency, breach of duty, or misconduct, may be removed, reduced, or suspended. The employee's name also may be stricken from the service register. If the board determines that the charges are not sustained, the accused, if suspended pending investigation, shall be immediately reinstated and shall be paid all back pay due for the period of suspension.
Findings, determinations, and orders of the commission for suspension, reduction, or removal, shall be in writing and shall be filed within three days after the completion of the hearing with the secretary of the commission. The secretary shall notify the employee of the decision in writing. Any person suspended, reduced, or removed by the commission after investigation may appeal in accordance with chapter 14.
The question to be determined by the court shall be:
"Upon the evidence, was the order of the commission reasonable?"
Notes of Decisions
Kunze v. White Bear Lake Police Civil Serv. Comm'n, 319 N.W.2d 61 (Minn. 1982).
· cites it 15× “” Appellant failed to perfect an appeal within 10 days as provided in Minn.Stat. § 419.12 (1980); but he did petition the Ramsey County District Court for a writ of certiorari on April 29, 1980.”
Thompson v. City of Appleton, 366 N.W.2d 326 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985).
· cites it 2× “Was the City Council’s decision to terminate Thompson arbitrary and capricious? ANALYSIS I A police officer for a Minnesota municipality cannot be discharged from duty unless “found guilty of inefficiency, breach of duty, or misconduct.”
Huff v. Sauer, 68 N.W.2d 252 (Minn. 1955).
“No appeal was taken from this action under § 419.12, but on April 22,1954, the present proceedings were commenced.”
Barlau v. City of Northfield, 568 F. Supp. 181 (D. Minnesota 1983).
· cites it 2× “Under the collective bargaining agreement, plaintiffs had a choice between appealing the NPCSC’s decision pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 419.12 or going to arbitration under the agreement’s grievance procedure.”
In re the Appeal of Hasty, 302 N.W.2d 15 (Minn. 1981).
· cites it 8× “Hasty immediately appealed to the district court pursuant to Minn.Stat. § 419.12 (1978) and sought an order to show cause why the decision of the commission should not be stayed pending determination of the appeal.”
Kunze v. Korolchuck, 349 N.W.2d 337 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 2× “The Supreme Court held that findings on a health problem of Officer Kunze were not supported by the evidence, and that there were no grounds for dismissal of Kunze under applicable state law, Minn. Stat. § 419.12 . The statute permits discharge only if an officer is “found…”
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.