Utah Code » Title 10, Chapter 3 — Municipal Government; part 10-3-10 — Civil Service Commission
Utah Code

Utah Code § 10-3-1012 (2026)

Suspension or discharge by department head -- Appeal to commission -- Hearing and decision

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section UT-LEGle.utah.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Subject to Subsection (1)(b), all persons in the classified civil service may be suspended as provided in Section 10-3-912, or removed from office or employment by the head of the department for misconduct, incompetency, failure to perform duties, or failure to observe properly the rules of the department, but subject to appeal by the suspended or discharged person to the civil service commission.
Before a law enforcement officer, as that term is defined in Section 53-13-103, who is in the classified civil service may be suspended for more than two days, demoted, or removed from employment under Subsection (1)(a), the law enforcement officer's employing agency shall, at a minimum:
notify the law enforcement officer of the allegations of wrongdoing that the employing agency believes may support a disciplinary action of suspension for more than two days, demotion, or removal;
give the law enforcement officer no less than two business days after the day on which the notification described in Subsection (1)(b)(i) is provided to submit a written reply to the agency head or the agency head's designated representative;
have the agency head, or the agency head's designated representative, consider any written reply submitted by the law enforcement officer; and
give the law enforcement officer an opportunity to be heard by the agency head or the agency head's designated representative.
The provisions of Subsection (1)(b) do not limit or alter the rights under this part of:
an employee in the classified civil service who is not a law enforcement officer; or
a law enforcement officer in a municipality that provides, by adopted policy, procedures that are more protective for the law enforcement officer than the procedures described in Subsection (1)(b).
Any person suspended or discharged under Subsection (1) may, within five days from the issuance by the head of the department of the order of suspension or discharge, appeal to the civil service commission, which shall fully hear and determine the matter.
The suspended or discharged person shall be entitled to appear in person and to have counsel and a public hearing.
The finding and decision of the civil service commission upon the hearing shall be certified to the head of the department from whose order the appeal is taken, and shall be final and immediately enforced by the head.
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 13 cases (1 in the last 5 years), 1980–2024 · leading case: Lucas v. Murray City Civil Serv. Comm'n, 949 P.2d 746 (Utah Ct. App. 1997).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Lucas v. Murray City Civil Serv. Comm'n, 949 P.2d 746 (Utah Ct. App. 1997). · cites it 32× “The City argues Lucas was afforded due process consistent with that required in Utah Code Ann. § 10-3-1012 (1996) and that any procedural defect was immaterial to the Commission's determination that Lucas's discharge was appropriate.”
Ogden City Corp. v. Harmon, 2005 UT App 274 (Utah Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 8× “See Utah Code Ann. § 10-3-1012 (2) (2003). 1 *975 ¶ 3 The Commission held hearings and, in its November 20, 2003 Finding of Fact, Conclusions of Law and Order, the commissioners agreed that several of the incidents tended to support the Fire Department’s decision to discipline.”
Harmon v. Ogden City Civil Serv. Comm'n, 2007 UT App 336 (Utah Ct. App. 2007). · cites it 7× “See Utah Code Ann. § 10-3-1012 (2) (2003). 2 T3 In examining the Fire Department's termination of Harmon, the Commission considered only Harmon's failure to appear at training meetings, the MDA Incident, the Weedkiller Incident, and the Drafting Pit Incident.”
Hatton-Ward v. Salt Lake City Corp., 828 P.2d 1071 (Utah Ct. App. 1992). · cites it 10× “The trial court dismissed his complaint for failure to first exhaust his administrative remedies before the Civil Service Commission (Commission) pursuant to Utah Code Ann. § 10-3-1012 (1986) (civil service statute).”
Salt Lake City Corp. v. Salt Lake City Civil Serv. Comm'n, 908 P.2d 871 (Utah Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 11× “Jones appealed the Chiefs termination to the Commission pursuant to Utah Code Ann. § 10-3-1012 (1992). The Commission held an evidentiary hearing to determine whether sufficient cause existed to terminate Jones.”
Worrall v. Ogden City Fire Dep't, 616 P.2d 598 (Utah 1980). · cites it 4× “The trial court ruled, both the state statute, Section 10-10-21 (currently Section 10-3-1012) and the Civil Service Rules required an appeal within five days, and both the statute and the rules constituted notice to the plaintiff of the five-day limitation.”
Kelly v. Salt Lake City Civil Serv. Comm'n, 8 P.3d 1048 (Utah Ct. App. 2000). · cites it 2× “1995) (discussing Utah Code Ann. § 10-3-1012 (1999), which says Commission "shall fully hear and determine" appeals of suspension or termination and that Commission's order "shall be final and immediately enforced").”
Harmon v. Ogden City Civil Serv. Comm'n, 917 P.2d 1082 (Utah 1996). · cites it 16× “Citing its earlier decision in the Harmon and Bick matters, the Commission determined that it did not have jurisdiction to hear Folk-man’s appeal.”
Harmon v. Ogden City Civil Serv. Comm'n, 890 P.2d 4 (Utah Ct. App. 1995). · cites it 6× “The Commission is authorized to hear appeals from certain decisions of department heads by Utah Code Ann. § 10-3-1012 (1992). This statute provides: Any person [in the classified civil service] suspended or discharged may, within five days from the issuance by the head of the…”
Leavitt v. Salt Lake City Corp., 2019 UT App 70 (Utah Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 2× “1995) (interpreting Utah Code section 10-3-1012, and stating that a commission may only give "a simple thumbs up or thumbs down" to the department head's decision).”
Taylorsville City v. Taylorsville City Emp. Appeal Bd., 2013 UT App 69 (Utah Ct. App. 2013). “§ 10-3-1012(2) (civil service commission); id.”
Hollenbach v. Salt Lake City Civil Serv. Comm'n, 2015 UT App 116 (Utah Ct. App. 2015). · cites it 2× “See Utah Code Ann. § 10-3-1012 (2) (LexisNexis 2012); Lucas v.”
Show all 13 citing cases →
— Utah Code § 10-3-1012(2) — 2 cases
Harmon v. Ogden City Civil Serv. Comm'n, 2007 UT App 336 (Utah Ct. App. 2007). “See Utah Code Ann. § 10-3-1012 (2) (2003). 2 T3 In examining the Fire Department's termination of Harmon, the Commission considered only Harmon's failure to appear at training meetings, the MDA Incident, the Weedkiller Incident, and the Drafting Pit Incident.”
Taylorsville City v. Taylorsville City Emp. Appeal Bd., 2013 UT App 69 (Utah Ct. App. 2013). “§ 10-3-1012(2) (civil service commission); id.”
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.