Lawyer business

The Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco (California) held that appellant former employer had discharged appellee former employee in violation of a collective bargaining agreement and confirmed an arbitration award for reinstatement and backpay. The former employer appealed.

After a hearing, the trial court held that a former employer had discharged its former employee in violation of a collective bargaining agreement and confirmed an arbitration award for reinstatement and backpay. On appeal, the former employer contended that the arbitrators exceeded their powers, that the award was contrary to law, and that it would contravene public policy for the court to enforce reinstatement of the discharged former employee. The Lawyer business held that the arbitration award was contrary to public policy and was, therefore, illegal and void. An arbitration award which directed that a member of the Communist Party who was dedicated to that party’s program of sabotage, force, violence be reinstated to employment in a plant, which produced antibiotics used by both the military and civilians, was against public policy.

The court reversed the judgment confirming an arbitration award for reinstatement and backpay in favor of the former employee, and remanded.

Defendant California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control appealed a decision of the Superior Court of the City and County of San Francisco (California), which granted a peremptory writ of mandate setting aside defendant’s decision ordering revocation of plaintiff corporation’s license.

Defendant California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control sought, under Cal. Const. art. XX, ┬ž 22, and Cal. Bus. & Prof. Code ┬ž 24200(a), to revoke the on-sale general bona fide public eating place license of plaintiff corporation, alleging that plaintiff permitted its female employees to display and expose their breasts to patrons. Defendant charged that the acts were contrary to public welfare or morals. Defendant’s hearing officers found that plaintiff’s license should be revoked, which defendant adopted. The Alcoholic Beverage Control Appeals Board affirmed defendant’s decision. The trial court found in plaintiff’s favor and ordered the issuance of a peremptory writ of mandate commanding defendant to set aside its decision, and found that there was no substantial evidence to show that the presence of topless waitresses was contrary to public health. The court affirmed the trial court’s decision because defendant’s decision was not supported by the findings and hence constituted an abuse of discretion. The court held that the action of defendant could not be approved on the basis that topless waitresses were per se contrary to public welfare or morals.

The court affirmed the trial court’s decision ordering the issuance of a peremptory writ of mandate commanding defendant California Department of Alcoholic Beverage Control to set aside its decision that revoked plaintiff corporation’s license. The court held that the decision of defendant was not supported by the findings and hence constituted an abuse of discretion.