Ct. 411 (2000); City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 726, 728 (2003). An action is "justified" when it is done upon adequate reasons sufficiently supported by credible evidence, when weighed by an unprejudiced mind; guided by common sense and by correct rules of law." Id. at 304, quoting Selectmen of Wakefield v. Judge of First Dist. Ct. of E. Middlesex, 262 Mass. 477, 482 (1928); Commissioners of Civil Service v.

Ct. 411 (2000); City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 726, 728 (2003). An action is justified when it is done upon adequate reasons sufficiently supported by credible evidence, when weighed by an unprejudiced mind; guided by common sense and by correct rules of law. Id. at 304, quoting Selectmen of Wakefield v. Judge of First Dist. Ct. of E. Middlesex, 262 Mass. 477, 482 (1928); Commissioners of Civil Service v.

City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 726, 728 (2003). An action is justified when it is done upon adequate reasons sufficiently supported by credible evidence, when weighed by an unprejudiced mind; guided by common sense and by correct rules of law. City of Cambridge at 304, quoting Selectmen of Wakefield v. Judge of First Dist. Ct. of E. Middlesex, 262 Mass. 477, 482 (1928). Commissioners of Civil Service v.

Ct. 411 (2000); City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 726, 728 (2003). An action is "justified" when it is done upon adequate reasons sufficiently supported by credible evidence, when weighed by an unprejudiced mind; guided by common sense and by correct rules of law." Id. at 304, quoting Selectmen of Wakefield v. Judge of First Dist. Ct. of E. Middlesex, 262 Mass. 477, 482 (1928); Commissioners of Civil Service v.

Ct. 411 (2000); City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 726, 728 (2003). An action is justified when it is done upon adequate reasons sufficiently supported by credible evidence, when weighed by an unprejudiced mind; guided by common sense and by correct rules of law. Id. at 304, quoting Selectmen of Wakefield v. Judge of First Dist. Ct. of E. Middlesex, 262 Mass. 477, 482 (1928); Commissioners of Civil Service v.

City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 726, 728 (2003). An action is justified when it is done upon adequate reasons sufficiently supported by credible evidence, when weighed by an unprejudiced mind; guided by common sense and by correct rules of law. 8 City of Cambridge at 304, quoting Selectmen of Wakefield v. Judge of First Dist. Ct. of E. Middlesex, 262 Mass. 477, 482 (1928). Commissioners of Civil Service v.

Ct. 411 (2000), City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 726, 728 (2003). The removal of a tenured civil service employee for a lack of funds is an action that the appointing authority may only make with requisite just cause, and that finding of just cause is subject to the Commissions review. LePage v. Department of Mental Retardation, Civil Service Commission Case No. D-03-416 (2005).

Ct. 411 (2000), City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 726, 728 (2003). The removal of a tenured civil service employee for a lack of funds is an action that the Appointing Authority may only make with requisite just cause, and that finding of just cause is subject to the Commissions review. LePage v. Department of Mental Retardation, Civil Service Commission Case No. D-03-416 (June 2005).

Id. at 187 (quoting City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass.App.Ct. 726, 728, rev. den., 440 Mass. 1108 (2003)). The commissions task, however, is not to be accomplished on a wholly blank slate. Falmouth v. Civil Serv. Commn, 447 Mass. 814, 823 (2006).

City of Leominster v. Stratton, 58 Mass. App. Ct. 726, 728 (2003) (citations omitted). If an appointing authority presents purported justifications for the bypass, an applicant must demonstrate that the reasons offered for the bypass were untrue, apply equally to the selected candidate and the bypassed candidate, are incapable of substantiation, or are a pretext for other impermissible reasons. Borelli v. MBTA, 1 MCSR 6 (1988).