Whitfield v. SCDSS

• Court: Court of Appeals of South Carolina
• Decided: October 3, 2012
• Docket: 2012-UP-546
• Status: Unpublished

Opinion

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA In The Court of Appeals

Elizabeth Gail Whitfield, Appellant,

v.

South Carolina Department of Social Services, Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2011-187286

Appeal From Richland County Shirley C. Robinson, Administrative Law Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2012-UP-546 Heard September 13, 2012 – Filed October 3, 2012

AFFIRMED

William Norman Epps, III, Epps, Nelson, & Epps, of Anderson, for Appellant.

Celeste Moore, South Carolina Department of Social Services, of Columbia, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: The Department of Social Services suspended and then terminated Elizabeth Whitfield's employment. The state employee grievance committee upheld those actions and denied Whitfield's subsequent request for reconsideration. The administrative law court affirmed the committee's decisions. We find that substantial evidence supports the ALC's decision and that it was not affected by an error of law. Therefore, we affirm pursuant to Rule 220(b)(1), SCACR, and the following authorities: S.C. Code Ann. § 1-23-610(B) (Supp. 2011) (providing this court may reverse the ALC's decision if, among other things, it is "clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record" or was affected by an error of law); Bell v. S.C. Dep't of Corr., 397 S.C. 320, 329, 724 S.E.2d 675, 680 (2012) (applying subsection 1-23- 610(B) in an employee grievance appeal); Risher v. S.C. Dep't of Health & Envtl. Control, 393 S.C. 198, 204, 712 S.E.2d 428, 431 (2011) (stating that under subsection 1-23-610(B), a decision of the ALC should be upheld "if it is supported by substantial evidence in the record").

AFFIRMED.

FEW, C.J., and WILLIAMS and PIEPER, JJ., concur.