Skip to main content
· 11/17/1980

Mazzola v. City and County of San Francisco

Citations

  • 112 Cal. App. 3d 141
  • 169 Cal. Rptr. 127
  • 105 L.R.R.M. (BNA) 3360
  • 1980 Cal. App. LEXIS 2442

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

  • where amendment consists of a deletion of an express provision, substantial change in law presumably intended
  • notice gives employee or officer “a chance to either appeal the agency’s determination” or else resolve the conflict by “resign[ing] from either his outside or agency position”
  • agency was precluded from alleging section 1126 violation where it knew of employee’s outside activities at time of appointment and did not notify him they were incompatible

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).

Judges: Miller

Read full opinion on CourtListener

Sourced from CourtListener / Free Law Project (CC0).

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.