Town of Falmouth v. Civil Service Commission, 61 Mass. App. Ct. 796, 800 (2004). The issue for the Commission is not whether it would have acted as the appointing authority had acted, but whether, on the facts found by the commission, there was reasonable justification for the action taken by the appointing authority in the circumstances found by the commission to have existed when the Appointing Authority made its decision. Watertown v.

Town of Falmouth v. Civil Service Commn, 447 Mass. 814, 823 (2006) and cases cited. For the foregoing reasons, I recommend that the decision of the Appointing Authority, the City of Chelsea, be affirmed. SO ORDERED. DATED: //-/3-2007 sie

Town of Falmouth v. Civil Service Commission, 61 Mass. App. Ct. 796, 800 (2004). The issue for the Commission is "not whether it would have acted as the appointing authority had acted, but whether, on the facts found by the commission, there was reasonable justification for the action taken by the appointing authority in the circumstances found by the commission to have existed when the Appointing Authority made its decision." Watertown v.

Town of Falmouth v. Civil Service Commission, 61 Mass. App. Ct. 796, 800 (2004). The issue for the Commission is not whether it would have acted as the appointing authority had acted, but whether, on the facts found by the commission, there was reasonable justification for the action taken by the appointing authority in the circumstances found by the commission to have existed when the appointing authority made its decision. Watertown v.

See Town of Falmouth v. Civil Service Commn, 441 Mass. 814, 82223 (2006); Flynn v. Attleboro, 23 MCSR 279 (2010); Mancuso v. City of Waltham, 22 MCSR 554 (2009); Donnelly v. Cambridge Public Schools, 21 MCSR 665 (2008); Novia v. City of Boston, 20 MCSR 639 (2007); Maurice v. Massachusetts Dept of Mental Health, 19 MCSR 328 (2006); Konikowski v. Department of Corrections, 10 MCSR 79 (1997); Springer v. Town of Saugus, 8 MCSR 154 (1995).

See, e.g., Town of Falmouth v. Civil Service Commn, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 606, 608-609 (2005), 5 revd other grounds, 447 Mass. 814 (2006); McGoldrick v. Boston Police Dept, 30 MCSR 161 (2017); Poore v. City of Haverhill, 29 MCSR 260 (2016); Stacy v. Department of Developmental Services, 29 MCSR 164 (2016); Volpicelli v. City of Woburn, 22 MCSR 448 (2009); Williamson v. Department of Transitional Assistance, 22 MCSR 436 (2009).

See, e.g., Town of Falmouth v. Civil Service Commn, 64 Mass. App. Ct. 606, 608-609 (2005), revd other grounds, 447 Mass. 814 (2006); McGoldrick v. Boston Police Dept, 30 5 MCSR 161 (2017); Poore v. City of Haverhill, 29 MCSR 260 (2016); Stacy v. Department of Developmental Services, 29 MCSR 164 (2016); Volpicelli v. City of Woburn, 22 MCSR 448 (2009); Williamson v. Department of Transitional Assistance, 22 MCSR 436 (2009).

Town of Falmouth v. Civil Service Commission, 61 Mass. App. Ct. 796, 800 (2004). The issue for the commission is "not whether it would have acted as the appointing authority had acted, but whether, on the facts found by the commission, there was reasonable justification for the action taken by the appointing authority in the circumstances found by the commission to have existed when the appointing authority made its decision." Watertown v.

Town of Falmouth v. Civil Service Commission, 61 Mass. App. Ct. 796, 800 (2004). 6 The issue here for the Commission is "not whether it would have acted as the appointing authority had acted, but whether, on the facts found by the commission, there was reasonable justification for the action taken by the appointing authority in the circumstances found by the commission to have existed when the Appointing Authority made its decision."

Town of Falmouth v. Civil Service Commission, 61 Mass. App. Ct. 796, 800 (2004). The Commission does not possess the authority to substitute its judgment about a valid exercise of discretion based on merit or policy considerations by an appointing authority. Id.