Hays v. Skelton

Court of Appeals of Georgia

Hays v. Skelton

244 S.E.2d 66, 145 Ga. App. 543, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2029

CourtCourt of Appeals of Georgia

DecidedMarch 16, 1978

Docket55399

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 244 S.E.2d 66 (Hays v. Skelton) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering Court of Appeals of Georgia primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Hays v. Skelton, 244 S.E.2d 66, 145 Ga. App. 543, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2029 (Ga. Ct. App. 1978).

Pincite

Opinion

Deen, Presiding Judge.

The appellant, an employee of the Department of Human Resources as a management analyst, was discharged for various acts of insubordination ranging from shaking his fist at a superior to wilfully refusing to follow directives relating to his work product. The State Personnel Board, after hearing evidence, found in favor of DHR, and on appeal this decision was affirmed by a judge of the Superior Court of Fulton County.

1. The appeal procedure was in compliance with the provisions of Code Ann. § 40-2207.1. There was a sufficient compliance with Code Ann. § 40-2204 (b) (4) requiring the State Personnel Board, after hearing, to file an appeals determination in writing "documented as to findings of fact, basis for decisions, and prescribed remedies.” The recommended decision of the hearing officer adopted by the board is some 15 pages long, sets out the evidence in substantial detail as to each charge, and contains findings of fact and conclusions of law. It is not inadequate for any reason contended.

2. On the appeal of this determination to the superior court, the judge is, by the terms of Code § 40-2207.l(m), circumscribed by the "any evidence” rule and is not to substitute his judgment for that of the board as to the weight of the evidence on questions of fact. Hall v. Ault, 240 Ga. 585 (1978); Ga. Dept. of Human Resources v. Holland, 133 Ga. App. 616 (211 SE2d 635) (1974). There is at least some evidence in support of each of the charges of insubordination.

Judgment affirmed.

Smith and Banke, JJ., concur.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Deen, Presiding Judge.

The appellant, an employee of the Department of Human Resources as a management analyst, was discharged for various acts of insubordination ranging from shaking his fist at a superior to wilfully refusing to follow directives relating to his work product. The State Personnel Board, after hearing evidence, found in favor of DHR, and on appeal this decision was affirmed by a judge of the Superior Court of Fulton County.

1. The appeal procedure was in compliance with the provisions of Code Ann. § 40-2207.1. There was a sufficient compliance with Code Ann. § 40-2204 (b) (4) requiring the State Personnel Board, after hearing, to file an appeals determination in writing "documented as to findings of fact, basis for decisions, and prescribed remedies.” The recommended decision of the hearing officer adopted by the board is some 15 pages long, sets out the evidence in substantial detail as to each charge, and contains findings of fact and conclusions of law. It is not inadequate for any reason contended.

2. On the appeal of this determination to the superior court, the judge is, by the terms of Code § 40-2207.l(m), circumscribed by the "any evidence” rule and is not to substitute his judgment for that of the board as to the weight of the evidence on questions of fact. Hall v. Ault, 240 Ga. 585 (1978); Ga. Dept. of Human Resources v. Holland, 133 Ga. App. 616 (211 SE2d 635) (1974). There is at least some evidence in support of each of the charges of insubordination.

Judgment affirmed.

Smith and Banke, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

244 S.E.2d 66, 145 Ga. App. 543, 1978 Ga. App. LEXIS 2029, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/hays-v-skelton-gactapp-1978.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack