J. Scott Tiedemann

Police Officer v. City (2022) – The City prevailed in a sergeant’s appeal of his termination for off-duty misconduct. While the sergeant was at a bar and intoxicated, he struck a subordinate officer in the genitals and choked him. Although the sergeant had no previous record of discipline and was well-regarded in the police department, the hearing officer upheld his termination given the severity of his misconduct.

Police Officer v. City (2021) – LCW prevailed in a police officer termination appeal involving one of two officers involved in a fatal shooting. The incident made national news when one of the officers, a field training officer (FTO), and his partner, a probationary officer who had lateraled from another agency, fired 75 rounds (many of which were through the windshield of a moving vehicle) in a slow speed pursuit on a Saturday morning in a quiet residential neighborhood. The FTO fired 11 rounds using a high-powered AR-15 rifle, failed to give the suspect an opportunity to surrender, failed to employ proper felony traffic stop tactics, and failed to provide effective feedback to his more junior partner.

Police Officers v. City (2020) – Successfully prosecuted disciplining judicial appeals of multiple officers terminated in connection with an internationally renowned incident of excessive force resulting in the death of a citizen. The dismissals were upheld by the trial court and the former officers dismissed their appeals at the California Court of Appeals.

Police Officer v. City (2019) – Hearing officer upheld the termination of a former police officer who prepared multiple false police reports. The police officer’s performance during a single incident led LCW to recommend an audit of other cases.  That audit, in turn, revealed additional cases and a pattern of fabricating subject confessions.

Police Officer v. City (2017) – Personnel commission upheld the termination of a police officer for false statements in court.

Police Officer v. City (2017) – Demotion of a peace officer for insubordination upheld after an administrative appeal.

Police Officer v. City (2017) – Civil service commission upheld the termination of a police officer for failure to disclose opiate use during the pre-employment medical examination.

Firefighter v. City (2016) – Administrative Law Judge upheld discipline of firefighter for misappropriation of private property left at a firehouse.

Police Officer v. City (2014) – A hearing officer upheld the termination of a police officer who misappropriated evidence – stolen power tools – and put it to use in his construction business. The officer claimed that an employee of a home improvement warehouse from which the property was originally stolen gave him permission to keep the tools.

Police Officer v. City (2014) – A former police officer abandoned his appeal after the Department’s presentation of its case in the Department proved the former officer had taken a title loan on his vehicle and then sold the same vehicle to an unsuspecting buyer from whom the vehicle was repossessed.

Oakland Police Officers’ Association et al. v. City of Oakland (2021) – Scott filed an amicus brief for the League of California Cities and Los Angeles County Police Chiefs Association, which resulted in a decision that expressly disagrees with the Santa Ana POA decision.  The decision concluded that mandatory disclosure of complaints and reports prior to any subsequent interrogation of an officer suspected of misconduct undermines a core objective of POBRA and only non-confidential material should be disclosed upon request.

San Francisco Police Officers’ Assoc. v. San Francisco Police Comm. (2018) – Filed an amicus brief for the League of Cities and the California State Association of Counties.  The police association argued that the employer was obligated to arbitrate denial of a grievance alleging that the employer breached a contractual obligation to negotiate changes to its use of force policy.  But the MOU only required the employer to negotiate over matters within the scope of representation and the Court of Appeal held, among other things, that establishment of a use of force policy is a management right and involves a municipality’s exercise of police power that cannot be bargained away.

County of Los Angeles v. Mendez (2017) – Submitted amicus brief at the U.S. Supreme Court on behalf of the Los Angeles County Police Chiefs Association.  The case held that the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeal’s provocation doctrine was inconsistent with the Supreme Court’s decision in Graham v. Connor, the seminal case establishing that an officer’s use of force must be judged according to an objective reasonableness standard.   The provocation doctrine had provided that officers could be liable for their otherwise reasonable force if they intentionally or recklessly committed an earlier Fourth Amendment violation that led to the use of force that injured plaintiff.

Hinderliter v. City of La Habra (2013) – After a personnel board upheld the termination of a police officer for dishonesty, a superior court judge determined that the dishonesty did not warrant termination of the officer’s employment. The Court of Appeal reversed the trial court, holding substantial evidence supported the trial court’s finding that the officer repeatedly lied to a superior officer and that the trial court erred in finding the City abused its discretion by terminating the officer.

Alice Robin v. City of Monrovia (2013) – Appellant Robin sued the City for allegedly retaliating against her, in violation of Title VII, after she filed complaints with the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission.  At trial, the jury was instructed to consider whether four separate actions by the City – including the offer of a retirement package known as the “Golden Handshake” – were retaliatory acts.  The jury returned a verdict in favor of the City and the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals affirmed.  Robin appealed on the grounds that the trial court erred by not giving a jury instruction that the settlement agreement offered to her as part of the Golden Handshake did not comply with the Older Workers Benefit Protection Act (OWBPA). The Ninth Circuit rejected this argument, but it did conclude that the district court erred by declining to give an instruction setting forth the OWBPA’s requirements.  Although the Court found error, it concluded that it was harmless based on the evidence at trial because it is more probable than not that the jury would have reached the same verdict even with the OWBPA instruction.

Ferguson v. City of Cathedral City (2011) – The Court of Appeal upheld termination of a police officer for solicitation of prostitution after the officer declared an earlier settlement agreement with the City “null and void” under which he had been suspended without pay.  The Court of Appeal also held that the City did not violate the officer’s Skelly rights when the officer, who claimed to be unable to be able to drive the City for a Skelly meeting, was terminated without a Skelly meeting after he did not avail himself of various accommodations offered to him by the City to enable him to exercise his Skelly rights.

Thompson v. City of Monrovia (2010) – In a case handled by Scott Tiedemann and Judith Islas, the Court of Appeal, second judicial district, affirmed summary judgment in this alleged retaliation and harassment case brought by a Caucasian police officer based on alleged discriminatory treatment towards his African-American co-worker.  Specifically, the officer claimed he was retaliated against for reporting alleged discriminatory treatment of his African-American co-worker and for testifying on the co-worker’s behalf in a separate lawsuit brought by the co-worker.  The officer also alleged the City failed to investigate the alleged harassment and retaliation. In a lengthy opinion, the Court decisively rejected all of the officer’s arguments.  Key in the court’s analysis was the long and well documented history of the officer’s performance issues.  On the harassment and hostile environment claims, the Court concluded that a Caucasian officer can premise these causes of action based on an association with or advocacy on behalf of another officer’s protected classification but must show he was personally subjected to unwanted racial comments as a result of the association or advocacy and also, that the conduct was severe and pervasive, which the officer failed to so in this case.

Lopez v. Imperial County Sheriff’s Office (2008) – Two correctional officers appealed a Personnel Board ruling upholding their terminations based upon a tie vote by the Board. The correctional officers argued that their terminations should be overturned on a tie vote. The Appellate Court rejected that position affirming the trial court’s ruling that the terminations were not to be overturned but the officers were to receive a new hearing.

Benach v. County of Los Angeles (2007) – The California Court of Appeal held that removing a deputy sheriff from his special assignment as a pilot “without a concomitant loss of rank or pay” is not a punitive action which entitles the deputy sheriff to an administrative appeal under the Public Safety Officers Procedural Bill of Rights Act.

Police Officers Association (2021) – Negotiated collective bargaining agreement that limited city’s pension liabilities and increased employee cost sharing in exchange for reasonable cost and living adjustments.

Miscellaneous Employees Association (2018) – Negotiated collective bargaining agreement that established 9/80 work schedule on a trial basis and afforded employer the ability to revert to 5/40 without further obligation to meet and confer.

Police Officers Association (2017) – Secured four-year collective bargaining agreement with police association that afforded city council flexibility to negotiate the fixed cost of living adjustments in last two years of an agreement without risk of fact-finding if increases were denied.

Police Officers Association (2017) – Negotiated memorandum of understanding that eliminated EPMC for classic members.

Miscellaneous Employees Association (2017) – Negotiated memorandum of understanding that eliminated EPMC for classic members.

Police Officer v. City (2024) – Convinced the California Court of Appeal to uphold City Manager’s decision to terminate a police officer for:  purchasing and facilitating the sale of a controlled substance; and being untruthful during the administrative investigation.  Successfully argued that the City Manager had the right under the MOU to disregard the hearing officer’s recommendation to reinstate the officer.

Police Officer v. City (2022) – Defeated a police officer’s legal challenge to the City Manager’s decision to terminate the officer’s employment for illegal steroid possession, use and sales.  Convinced the superior court that the memorandum of understanding gave the City Manager the right to reject the hearing officer’s recommended decision to reinstate the officer.  The superior court found that the officer’s proven dishonest testimony and his willingness to buy and sell the illegal steroid made him unfit to be a police officer.

Police Officer v. City, City Manager and Police Chief (2022) – Defeated a police officer’s writ of mandate in the superior court.  Officer challenged his removal from a FTO assignment and assignment pay after he  and his trainee delayed responding to a 911 call about an young man ringing a neighbors’ doorbell at 4:30 am and screaming obscenities.  Once at the call, the FTO remained in the patrol call while the trainee searched the area alone.  Convinced the court the FTO must lead by example and had failed to meet those high standards.