California Professional License Defense Lawyer

What is an Administrative Writ of Mandamus or Writ of Mandate (CA Government Code section 1094.5)?

A common way to challenge the decision of a government entity, such as the California Department of Consumer Affairs, the Department of Motor Vehicles, the Board of Registered Nursing, or the Commission on Teacher Credentialing, is by filing an administrative writ of mandamus, often referred to as a “writ of mandate” or “judicial review” under California Government Code Section 1094.5.

If the government seeks to discipline or deny you a professional license, or another type of license such as a daycare license or driver’s license, the licensee is typically afforded the right to an administrative hearing. These hearings allow the individual to contest the denial, suspension, or revocation of their license. Administrative hearings are usually held before an Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) at one of California’s Offices of Administrative Hearings. However, in some cases (such as DMV license suspension hearings), a DMV hearing officer presides over the hearing, instead of an ALJ.

Following the hearing, the ALJ (or hearing officer) will issue a decision, commonly referred to as Findings and Order. This decision is not immediately final. It is first sent to the government agency, such as the Department of Insurance, the Board of Real Estate, the Board of Behavioral Sciences, the Department of Social Services, or another relevant agency. The government licensing agency then reviews the ALJ’s decision and has the authority to adopt, reject, or amend the decision before issuing a final decision. This final decision is what the license holder or applicant will receive as the conclusion of their case.

If the license holder or applicant disagrees with the final decision concerning their license, they have two limited options:

1. Request for Reconsideration: A petition for reconsideration may be made to the licensing board or agency. However, this option is only viable if the licensee has new and relevant information that was not available at the time of the original hearing. Without such new evidence, this option is not likely to succeed.
2. Writ of Mandate: The second, and more common option, is to challenge the final decision by filing a writ of mandate in the superior court under Government Code Section 1094.5. This writ asks the court to review the administrative decision to determine whether the agency acted within its authority, followed the law, and provided the licensee with a fair hearing. It is important to note that the court’s review is generally limited to whether there was a “prejudicial abuse of discretion,” meaning that the agency acted without or in excess of its jurisdiction, failed to provide a fair trial, or made a decision that is not supported by the evidence.

Because writs of mandate are extremely complex and technical legal matters, it is crucial to seek legal counsel from an attorney with extensive experience handling these types of cases. Jonathan Turner is one of the few attorneys in California with a vast amount of experience in handling writs of mandate for professional license defense.

It is important to understand that there is a strict time limit for filing a writ of mandate after receiving the final decision from the government agency. Under California law, the petition must generally be filed within 30 days of receiving the final decision, although specific time limits may vary depending on the agency involved. Failing to meet this deadline can result in the loss of your right to challenge the decision.

If you have received an adverse decision regarding your license or license application following an administrative hearing, contact Writ of Mandate Attorney Jonathan Turner immediately to discuss your options. Mr. Turner will help evaluate whether pursuing a writ of mandate is the right course of action based on the facts of your case and the likelihood of success.