Legal Opinion

Hamm v. City of Santa Ana

California Court of Appeal

Decided May 16, 1969No. Civ. No. 9225PublishedCited by 4 opinions

1Opinion of the CourtMcCABE, P. J.

By his petition, it appears petitioner commenced his employment with the City of Santa Ana (hereinafter referred to as “City”) in 1964 under civil service rules. In December 1967, he had a classification of patrolman with the police department of the City. The record before us does not indicate whether petitioner had tenure under civil service. From his petition which incorporated civil service ordinances and his allegations requesting a hearing before the civil service board regarding the termination of his employment, it may be assumed he had some type of civil service status, although it…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Civic Center Ass'n of Los Angeles v. Railroad CommissionCalifornia Supreme Court · 1917
  2. People v. PorterCalifornia Supreme Court · 1856
  3. Horrigan v. Mayor of PittsfieldMassachusetts Supreme Judicial Court · 1937
  4. Sawyer v. City of San AntonioTexas Supreme Court · 1950
  5. People Ex Rel. Adamowski v. KernerIllinois Supreme Court · 1960

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

3Cited by4 opinions

  1. Armistead v. State Personnel BoardCalifornia Supreme Court · 1978
  2. Norton v. City of Santa AnaCalifornia Court of Appeal · 1971
  3. Britton v. City of TrinidadColorado Court of Appeals · 1984
  4. Hollobaugh v. Pohl Transportation, Inc.District Court, S.D. Ohio · 2022

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API