 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Quinlan v. Ohio Dept. of Commerce6/27/1996
DESHLER, Judge.
This is an appeal from a judgment of the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas affirming an order of appellee, the Ohio Department of Commerce, Division of Consumer Finance, imposing civil penalties upon appellant, Curtiss A. Quinlan, for violations of statutes and rules governing his Class A private investigator's license.
The basis for this appeal is found in two administrative proceedings initiated against appellant by the division for alleged violations of sections of the Revised Code and Ohio Administrative Code governing private investigators. The two separate proceedings against appellant by the division were eventually addressed in a single order issued by the division dated June 8, 1994, ordering a civil penalty of $3,500 but waiving all but $1,000 of it. The three bases given in the division's order were, first, the failure of appellant to timely return identification cards of terminated employees as required under Ohio Adm.Code 1301:4-5-11 and report their terminations on the appropriate form; second, the failure of appellant to register certain employees as private investigators with the division; and, third, the failure of appellant, on three occasions, to permit division investigators to have access to his corporate business records.
Appellant subsequently filed an appeal under R.C. 119.12 from the order of the division in the Franklin County Court of Common Pleas, which, on April 29,1995, issued a decision affirming the final order of the division as being supported by reliable, probative and substantial evidence and in accordance with law. Appellant has timely appealed and brings the following six assignments of error:
"First Assignment of Error
"The division and lower court erred in finding that the licensee violated Administrative Rule 1301:4-5-11.
"Second Assignment of Error
"The lower court and the Division of Licensing erred in their interpretation of Ohio Revised Code 4749.01(H)(3).
"Third Assignment of Error
"The lower court erred in refusing to recognize that the issues concerning licensing requirements are res judicata.
"Fourth Assignment of Error
"The lower court erred in refusing to recognize the conflict in laws between Ohio Revised Code 4749.13(B)(3), Ohio Revised Code 149.43, Ohio Administrative Code 1301:4-[5-]13, and Ohio Revised Code 1301-4-5-17 and further erred in refusing to resolve the conflicts in favor of the licensee.
"Fifth Assignment of Error
"The court erred in refusing to acknowledge that Fifth Amendment protections apply to individual licensees.
"Sixth Assignment of Error
"The lower court erred in failing to recognize that the remedy for failure to honor a subpoena is contempt of court, not an administrative procedure or penalty."
In an appeal involving an administrative decision pursuant to R.C. 119.12, the standard of review for an appellate court is whether the court of common pleas abused its discretion in finding that the administrative order was or was not supported by reliable, probative and substantial evidence and in accordance with law. An appellate court does not determine the weight given to the evidence heard before an agency in proceedings on appeal in a lower court. Rossford Exempted Village School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. State Bd. of Edn. (1992), 63 Ohio St.3d 705, 590 N.E.2d 1240.
"The fact that the court of appeals * * * might have arrived at a different conclusion than did the administrative agency is immaterial. Appellate courts must not substitute their judgment for those
Page 1 2 3 4 5 6 Ohio Employee Leasing Services
Employee Leasing Services
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to Employee Leasing Services in your area.
|
|