Noguchi v. Civil Service Com., B009475

• Decision Date: 12 December 1986
• Docket Number: No. B009475,B009475
• Citation: 232 Cal.Rptr. 394,187 Cal.App.3d 1521
• Court: California Court of Appeals Court of Appeals
• Parties: Thomas T. NOGUCHI, M.D., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION of the COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES; Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, Peter F. Schabarum, Edmond D. Edelman, Deane Dana, Michael D. Antonovich; Chief Administrative Officer, Harry L. Hufford, Defendants and Respondents.

Page 394

232 Cal.Rptr. 394

187 Cal.App.3d 1521

Thomas T. NOGUCHI, M.D., Plaintiff and Appellant, v. CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION of the COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES; Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors, Peter F. Schabarum, Edmond D. Edelman, Deane Dana, Michael D. Antonovich; Chief Administrative Officer, Harry L. Hufford, Defendants and Respondents.

No. B009475.

Court of Appeal, Second District, Division 7, California.

Dec. 12, 1986.

Review Denied March 11, 1987.

Godfrey Isaac and Daniel M. Toll, Los Angeles, for plaintiff and appellant

Skadden, Arps, Slate, Meagher & Flom, William A. Masterson and Harriet S. Posner, Los Angeles, for defendants and respondents.

MACKEY, Associate Justice. ^*

This is an appeal by appellant Thomas T. Noguchi, M.D. (Dr. Noguchi) from a judgment denying a peremptory writ of mandate.

By mandate petition, Dr. Noguchi sought judicial review of the action of respondent Civil Service Commission (Commission) in denying his appeals from the County's disciplinary action against him of a 30-day suspension and removal from his position as Chief Medical Examiner-Coroner.

I STATEMENT OF RELEVANT FACTS

For approximately 25 years Dr. Noguchi has held a permanent position with the County of Los Angeles (County) in the Chief Medical Examiner-Coroner's Department of the County of Los Angeles (Department). In 1967 Dr. Noguchi was appointed to the position of Chief Medical Examiner-Coroner of the County of Los Angeles.

By letter dated March 12, 1982, the County notified Dr. Noguchi of its intent to suspend him without pay for 30 days from his permanent position of Chief Medical Examiner-Coroner effective March 19, 1982, on the grounds that: (1) the operations of the Department had been found to be seriously deficient; (2) Dr. Noguchi failed to inform the Board of Supervisors of the problems in the Department; (3) Dr. Noguchi's involvement in outside activities had deprived the Department of leadership; (4) Dr. Noguchi inappropriately delegated authority for medical functions to a professionally unqualified manager; and (5) Dr. Noguchi demonstrated poor judgment in public statements regarding celebrity deaths.

Thereafter by letter dated March 25, 1982, Peter F. Schabarum, Chairman of the Board of Supervisors, notified Dr. Noguchi that Dr. Noguchi would be suspended, without pay, from March 29, 1982 to and including April 27, 1982. The letter stated that the Board of Supervisors (Board) found Dr. Noguchi's response to its March 12, 1982 letter inadequate.

Meanwhile, at or about the time that the Board made its decision to suspend Dr. Noguchi, the Grand Jury of Los Angeles County made an independent audit of Dr. Noguchi's Department.

By letter dated April 16, 1982, from Supervisor Schabarum to Dr. Noguchi, the By letter dated April 27, 1982, from Supervisor Schabarum to Dr. Noguchi, the Board of Supervisors notified Dr. Noguchi of his demotion from Chief Medical Examiner-Coroner to Physician Specialist, M.D. effective April 28, 1982. The Board of Supervisors voted four-to-one to demote Dr. Noguchi.

Board of Supervisors informed Dr. Noguchi of its intent to demote Dr. Noguchi from his permanent position of Chief Medical Examiner-Coroner of Los Angeles County to the position of Physician Specialist, M.D., effective April 28, 1982. The grounds for the demotion were identical to those grounds set forth by the Board of Supervisors for the suspension of Dr. Noguchi with one exception. The Board of Supervisors included a charge against Dr. Noguchi that he had misused the power of his office regarding a request by Eli Lilly & Co. to gain access to the records of the Department for a scientific study.

By letter dated May 6, 1982, Dr. Noguchi through his attorney Godfrey Isaac officially appealed his demotion and requested a hearing before the Civil Service Commission.

Commencing on July 19, 1982 and concluding on November 5, 1982, the Administrative Hearing lasted a total of 19 days. The reporter's transcripts of the Administrative Hearing are in excess of 3,500 pages and in 20 separate volumes. Further, hundreds of pages of exhibits were offered and admitted into evidence and considered by the Hearing Officer, Sara Adler. At the trial before Hearing Officer Adler, the County established that it had substantial good cause to take the action of suspension and removal against Dr. Noguchi.

Although stating Dr. Noguchi's problems in great detail, the Hearing Officer recommended against his removal, suggesting instead that the 30-day suspension serve as a "final warning" to him. Given the evidence of Dr. Noguchi's shortcomings, Commission rejected that recommendation and affirmed Dr. Noguchi's suspension and removal from office. Dr. Noguchi thereupon filed his petition for administrative mandate with the Los Angeles Superior Court.

After issue was joined, Dr. Noguchi moved the superior court for a peremptory writ.

As framed by Dr. Noguchi, the major issues for decision on the motion were whether the findings were supported by the evidence and whether there had been an abuse of discretion in the discipline imposed on him. Appellant made some "due process" claims that his rights have been violated by the denials of his motion before the Commission trial to disqualify both the hearing officer and counsel for respondent County.

The superior court (Norman Epstein, Judge) reviewed the entire record and made its independent judgment on the evidence. It ruled that the findings of the Civil Service Commission were proper, supported by the evidence and that there had been no abuse of discretion in the discipline imposed on Dr. Noguchi.

The hearing before the superior court started on June 22, 1984 and lasted for less than one day. After the superior court pronounced its decision, Dr. Noguchi requested a written statement of decision per Code of Civil Procedure section 632. The superior court rejected the request as not timely, since made after pronouncement of decision rather than before submission as required by section 632. Thereafter, defendant appealed his case.

II ISSUES PRESENTED FOR REVIEW

A. A claim that there is no substantial evidence to affirm his demotion;

B. A claimed lack of due process in various aspects of the proceedings before the Civil Service Commission;

C. Alleged abuses of discretion by the County and the superior court with respect to his demotion.

A. Was There Substantial Evidence to Support Dr. Noguchi's Removal

A review of the 39 findings by the 1976 Management Review indicated that there were "serious management deficiencies" in the Department in a number of respects.

Also, a management audit was performed by personnel of the County Administrator Officer's (CAO) staff, a panel of three outside experts and a simultaneous review was done by the Los Angeles County Grand Jury.

Findings 11 and 12 were as follows:

"11. The conclusions of the Management Audit and of the Grand Jury Review were that there were serious deficiencies in the space, number and training of personnel, equipment and operations of the Department.

"12. Although some deficiencies were found throughout the Department, the deficiencies were the most serious and widespread in the Investigations Division, in the scientific laboratories and in the handling of personal property."

These findings are supported by substantial evidence, as was found by the superior court in its independent review of evidence.

According to Health and Safety Code sections 10250-10252 and Government Code sections 27460-27531, the primary mission of the Department of Chief Medical Examiner-Coroner is to determine the circumstances, manner and causes of all deaths within its jurisdiction. The Department was required to perform autopsies in certain cases and to deliver death certificates as soon as possible after post-mortem examinations. As Coroner and Department head, Dr. Noguchi had the duty and responsibility to manage and administer the Department so that it could carry out its statutorily imposed duties effectively and efficiently. Dr. Noguchi acknowledged that his duties as Department head were "primarily administrative and management."

As Coroner and head of the Department, Dr. Noguchi was directly and solely responsible to the Board, a fact that Noguchi has also acknowledged:

"The Los Angeles County Chief Medical Examiner-Coroner is in fact a separate entity in that it is a department of this County's government. The Coroner is responsible only to the County's Board of Supervisors."

In keeping with this responsibility, Dr. Noguchi was obligated to report directly to the Board and to keep the Board apprised of the state of the Department.

The 1982 audit, like the 1976 review, found that there were serious management problems in the Department that were directly attributable to Dr. Noguchi. The 1982 audit concluded, inter alia, that there was a lack of adequate central management and control in the Department and that there was a lack of effective evidence control procedures in the Department. Moreover, the 1982 audit revealed that Dr. Noguchi had either failed to implement or had abandoned many of the recommendations made in the 1976 review to improve the Department's administration and operations. Each of the findings and recommendations of the 1982 audit was reviewed by the management audit team with Dr. Noguchi and Richard Wilson at an exit interview on March 4, 1982. The proof is uncontradicted that, except for one minor modification regarding the contracting out of histopathology slides, Dr. Noguchi concurred in and "signed off" on the findings of the 1982 audit.

The third report that established Dr. Noguchi's mismanagement was the 1982 Los Angeles County Grand Jury Review (Grand Jury Review) of the Department undertaken in compliance with the Grand Jury's statutory obligations under California Penal Code section 928. ¹ It was conducted by the independent auditing firm of Peat, Marwick Mitchell & Co. (Peat, Marwick)...