The San Mateo County (Chope) Community Hospital hired P as a histotechnician. Histotechnicians prepare tissue samples for microscopic analysis by pathologists. P completed her training in histology at Stanford University. She was licensed as a histotechnician by the American Society of Clinical Pathologists. Prior to her employment at Chope, she worked as a histotechnician for about four years at hospitals operated by Stanford University and Oxford University. Six months after P started work at Chope, two doctors asked her on several occasions to perform a procedure known as 'grosscutting.' Grosscutting consists of the selection and removal of small tissue samples of approximately one centimeter in breadth from organs or other large (gross) specimens removed by a doctor from a patient. On the basis of a microscopic examination of these samples, a pathologist diagnoses the patient's condition. P declined to perform grosscutting on tissue removed from live patients because grosscutting exceeded her capabilities as a histotechnician. She believed that the accuracy of a pathologist's diagnosis depends in large part on the selection and cutting of the small samples. A patient's life and health could hinge on the quality of the diagnosis. In her view, such life-and-death matters should be handled by physicians or by specially trained technicians. This view accorded with her experience at Stanford and Oxford, where histotechnicians had not been permitted to perform grosscutting. The other histotechnician complained about having to do all of the grosscutting work. On September 29, P was asked to perform the work and she refused. A Chope official warned her that she could be subject to discipline. P was suspended from work for two days in October. After a full adversary hearing, the county civil service commission (commission) upheld the suspension on February 2, 1979. P contacted three outside pathologists. One, a professor of pathology at Stanford, had been a teacher of hers. Another had worked with her at the Stanford University Medical Center. The third was an official of the American Society of Clinical Pathologists, from which P held her license as a histotechnician. These three physicians supported her refusal to perform grosscutting. P was repeatedly ordered to perform grosscutting or face discharge. She continued to refuse. On February 26, Chope discharged her for incompetence and insubordination. P applied for unemployment benefits. The claims interviewer awarded benefits. Chope appealed. The commission found that Chope's orders were 'reasonable' and that P had committed 'insubordination' in disobeying them. P presented signed statements by two of the outside pathologists and testified that the third was available to testify by phone. The administrative law judge (ALJ) ruled that P had committed misconduct by repeatedly and wilfully violating her employer's orders. He concluded that her deliberate violation of a reasonable order constituted misconduct within the meaning of section 1256. P appealed to D which affirmed. P petitioned the superior court for a writ of mandate. The court denied the petition. P appealed.

This section contains the nature of the case and procedural background.

The legal issues presented in this case will be displayed here.

The court's holding and decision will be displayed here.

Legal analysis from Dean's Law Dictionary will be displayed here.