Town of Falmouth v. Civil Service Commission, 447 Mass. 814, 824, 857 N.E.2d 1052, 1059 (2006)(quoting Police Commissioner of Boston v. Civil Service Commission, 39 Mass. App. Ct. 594, 600, 659 N.E.2d 1190, 1194 (1996)). Here, there is no evidence that the Citys decision to terminate Brancaccio was based on any improper political consideration, bias, or favoritism. Termination is no doubt a far harsher penalty than Brancaccio expected.

Town of Falmouth v. Civil Service Commission, 61 Mass. App. Ct. 796, 800 (2004). 10 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 basis of my conclusion rests with my finding that the testimony of Lynn Sheehan was extremely credible. In Connor v. Connor, 77 A.2d 697 (Pa. 1951), the Pennsylvania Appeals Court held that the "opportunity to observe demeanor and appearance of witnesses in many instances becomes the very touchstone of credibility. School Committee of Wellesley 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.

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 of the action taken by the appointing authority in the 10 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). 9 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.

Unless the Commissions findings of fact differ significantly from those reported by the appointing authority or interpret the relevant law in a substantially different way, the commission is not free to substitute its judgment for that of the appointing authority, and cannot modify a penalty on the basis of essentially similar fact finding without an adequate explanation E.g., Town of Falmouth v. Civ. Serv. Commn, 447 Mass. 814, 823 (2006).

Civil Service Commn, 39 Mass.App.Ct. 594,600 659 N.E.2d 1190 (1996) Unless the Commissions findings of fact differ significantly from those reported by the appointing authority or interpret the relevant law in a substantially different way, the commission is not free to substitute its judgment for that of the appointing authority, and cannot modify a penalty on the basis of essentially 10 similar fact finding without an adequate explanation E.g., Town

Town of Falmouth v. Civil Service Commission, 61 Mass. App. Ct. 796, 800 (2004). The basis of my conclusion rests with my finding that the testimony of John Gollinger and Walter McGuire, the Assistant Executive Director and Executive Director of the WHA respectively, was extremely credible. See Connor v.