§ 1-23-380 — Judicial review upon exhaustion of administrative remedies.

South Carolina § 1-23-380

• Jurisdiction: South Carolina
• Title 1: ADMINISTRATION OF THE GOVERNMENT
• Ch. 23: STATE AGENCY RULE MAKING AND ADJUDICATION OF CONTESTED CASES

Text

A party who has exhausted all administrative remedies available within the agency and who is aggrieved by a final decision in a contested case is entitled to judicial review pursuant to this article and Article 1. This section does not limit utilization of or the scope of judicial review available under other means of review, redress, relief, or trial de novo provided by law. A preliminary, procedural, or intermediate agency action or ruling is immediately reviewable if review of the final agency decision would not provide an adequate remedy. Except as otherwise provided by law, an appeal is to the court of appeals. (1) Proceedings for review are instituted by serving and filing notice of appeal as provided in the South Carolina Appellate Court Rules within thirty days after the final decision of the agency or, if a rehearing is requested, within thirty days after the decision is rendered. Copies of the notice of appeal must be served upon the agency and all parties of record. (2) Except as otherwise provided in this chapter, the serving and filing of the notice of appeal does not itself stay enforcement of the agency decision. The serving and filing of a notice of appeal by a licensee for review of a fine or penalty or of its license stays only those provisions for which review is sought and matters not affected by the notice of appeal are not stayed. The serving or filing of a notice of appeal does not automatically stay the suspension or revocation of a permit or license authorizing the sale of beer, wine, or alcoholic liquor. The agency may grant, or the reviewing court may order, a stay upon appropriate terms, upon the filing of a petition under Rule 65 of the South Carolina Rules of Civil Procedure. (3) If a timely application is made to the court for leave to present additional evidence, and it is shown to the satisfaction of the court that the additional evidence is material and that there were good reasons for failure to present it in the proceeding before the agency, the court may order that the additional evidence be taken before the agency upon conditions determined by the court. The agency may modify its findings and decision by reason of the additional evidence and shall file the evidence and modifications, new findings, or decisions with the reviewing court. (4) The review must be conducted by the court and must be confined to the record. In cases of alleged irregularities in procedure before the agency, not shown in the record, and established by proof satisfactory to the court, the case may be remanded to the agency for action as the court considers appropriate. (5) The court may not substitute its judgment for the judgment of the agency as to the weight of the evidence on questions of fact. The court may affirm the decision of the agency or remand the case for further proceedings. The court may reverse or modify the decision if substantial rights of the appellant have been prejudiced because the administrative findings, inferences, conclusions, or decisions are: (a) in violation of constitutional or statutory provisions; (b) in excess of the statutory authority of the agency; (c) made upon unlawful procedure; (d) affected by other error of law; (e) clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record; or (f) arbitrary or capricious or characterized by abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion.

Legislative History

HISTORY: 1977 Act No. 176, Art. II, SECTION 8; 1993 Act No. 181, SECTION 18; 2006 Act No. 387, SECTION 2, eff July 1, 2006; 2008 Act No. 334, SECTION 5, eff June 16, 2008. Editor's Note 2006 Act No. 387, SECTION 53, provides as follows: "This act is intended to provide a uniform procedure for contested cases and appeals from administrative agencies and to the extent that a provision of this act conflicts with an existing statute or regulation, the provisions of this act are controlling." 2006 Act No. 387, SECTION 57, provides as follows: "This act takes effect on July 1, 2006, and applies to any actions pending on or after the effective date of the act. No pending or vested right, civil action, special proceeding, or appeal of a final administrative decision exists under the former law as of the effective date of this act, except for appeals of Department of Health and Environmental Control Ocean and Coastal Resource Management and Environmental Quality Control permits that are before the Administrative Law Court on the effective date of this act and petitions for judicial review that are pending before the circuit court. For those actions only, the department shall hear appeals from the administrative law judges and the circuit court shall hear pending petitions for judicial review in accordance with the former law. Thereafter, any appeal of those actions shall proceed as provided in this act for review. For all other actions pending on the effective date of this act, the action proceeds as provided in this act for review." Effect of Amendment The 2006 amendment rewrote this section to provide for review by an administrative law judge and appeal to the South Carolina Court of Appeals. The 2008 amendment deleted subsection (B) relating to review by an administrative law judge of a final decision in a contested case; deleted the designation of the first paragraph as subsection (A) and at the end of the first sentence substituted "pursuant to this article and Article 1" for "under this article, Article 1, and Article 5"; in paragraph (1) deleted ", the Administrative Law Court," following "agency"; in the fourth sentence of paragraph (2) deleted "or administrative law judge" following "agency"; and in the second sentence of paragraph (4) deleted "or the Administrative Law Court" following "agency" in two places.