How have courts considered the right to discovery in a disciplinary proceeding?
California, United States of America
The following excerpt is from Tuckwell v. State Pers. Bd., A140815 (Cal. App. 2016):
3. For this final point, she relied on two cases considering the right to discovery in disciplinary proceedings, Nightingale v. State Personnel Board (1972) 7 Cal.3d 507, 516-518 [ 19574.1], and Shively v. Stewart (1966) 65 Cal.2d 475, 479-480 [nonstatutory right to discovery in disciplinary proceeding].
"The most advanced legal research software ever built."
The above passage should not be considered legal advice. Reliable answers to complex legal questions require comprehensive research memos. To learn more visit www.alexi.com.
Other Questions
In reviewing the severity of discipline imposed by an administrative body in a mandamus proceeding, does the court need to consider the correctness of the decision of the administrative agency rather than that of the trial court? (California, United States of America)
How will the Court consider documents filed in connection with an application to stay the trial court proceedings pending the conclusion of this appeal? (California, United States of America)
How have courts considered the importance of privacy rights in the context of First Amendment and First Privacy Rights? (California, United States of America)
How have courts considered the claim of right defense in carjacking cases? (California, United States of America)
What factors will the US Supreme Court consider when determining a termination of parental rights? (California, United States of America)
In a post-appeal collateral proceeding, can an attorney error be considered a cause for failure to raise a claim in a subsequent collateral proceeding? (California, United States of America)
How have the courts treated human rights abuses in the context of human rights legislation? (California, United States of America)
Does a claim of ineffective assistance in a habeas corpus proceeding need to be considered in a separate proceeding rather than on appeal? (California, United States of America)
How have courts interpreted "the people's right to due process" not to include the right to compel the press to supply unpublished information obtained in the newsgathering process? (California, United States of America)
Does the Court of Appeal have found that Defendant Joiner did not waive his assumed constitutional right to be personally present at the remand hearing and that the court erred in conducting that hearing in his absence? (California, United States of America)
