Writ application granted. See per curiam.
Granted. The decision of the court of appeal is reversed and the ruling of the Civil Service Commission is reinstated. Based on the particular facts of this case, we find the Commissions decision upholding Mr. Turners demotion was not arbitrary and capricious and did not constitute an abuse of discretion. See Regis v. Dept of Police, 13-1124 (La. 6/28/13), 121 So.3d 665 (per curiam); Gant v. New Orleans Police Dept, 19-0640, p. 14 (La.App. 4 Cir. 12/4/19), 286 So.3d 524, 533 (“under the arbitrary and capricious standard, [an appointing authority] need only advance a rational basis for its disciplinary decision”).
REVERSED; CIVIL SERVICE COMMISSION JUDGMENT REINSTATED
I agree with the majority and Judge Loves dissent to the court of appeal opinion. Specifically, I believe Mr. Turners physical and verbal harassment of his subordinates provides a rational basis for determining Mr. Turner was unfit for his rank and position. Walters v. Dept of Police of New Orleans, 454 So. 2d 106, 114 (La. 1984) (“In judging the commissions exercise of its discretion in determining whether the disciplinary action is based on legal cause and the punishment is commensurate with the infraction, the court should not modify the commissions order unless it is arbitrary, capricious or characterized by abuse of discretion.”). In Newman v. Dept of Fire, this Court explained that “[t]he public puts its trust in the fire department as a guardian of its safety, and it is important that the department be allowed to set appropriate standards of conduct for its employees sworn to uphold that trust.” Newman, 425 So.2d 753, 756 (La. 1983). Finding the same rule should apply to police departments, I agree with the majority that the Commissions decision to uphold Mr. Turners demotion was not arbitrary, capricious, or an abuse of discretion.
Weimer, C.J., would grant and docket.
Hughes, J., would deny.
Crichton, J., additionally concurs and assigns reasons.