South Carolina              
Administrative Law Court
Edgar A. Brown building 1205 Pendleton St., Suite 224 Columbia, SC 29201 Voice: (803) 734-0550

SC Administrative Law Court Decisions

CAPTION:
Botanas La Poblana, LLC vs. SCDOR

AGENCY:
South Carolina Department of Revenue

PARTIES:
Petitioners:
Botanas La Poblana, LLC

Respondents:
South Carolina Department of Revenue
 
DOCKET NUMBER:
07-ALJ-17-0505-CC

APPEARANCES:
n/a
 

ORDERS:

ORDER OF DISMISSAL

This matter is before the Administrative Law Court (“ALC” or “Court”) pursuant to a request for a contested case hearing filed on October 3, 2007 by Botanas La Poblana, LLC (“Petitioner”) regarding the South Carolina Department of Revenue’s (“Department”) decision to administratively deny its application for an on-premises beer and wine permit due to a protest.

By letter dated October 23, 2007, the Court notified Petitioner that pursuant to Rule 8(A) of the Rules of Procedure for the ALC, Botanas La Poblana, LLC, may only be represented in this matter by an attorney admitted to practice in South Carolina, either permanently or pro hac vice. The letter further requested that Petitioner inform the Court in writing within fifteen (15) days of the date of the letter on how it planned to proceed. No response to the letter was received by the Court. Further, the Court did not receive any other communication or correspondence regarding the letter.

Therefore, on November 21, 2007, the Court issued a Notice of Hearing, setting the matter for a hearing on the merits before the undersigned Judge. In the Notice of Hearing, the Court ordered that, pursuant to Rennaissance Enterprises, Inc. v. Summit Teleservices, Inc., 334 S.C. 649, 515 S.E.2d 257 (1999) and Rule 8(A) of the Rules of Procedure for the ALC, Petitioner must be represented by an attorney admitted to practice either permanently or pro hac vice both at the hearing in this matter and in any filings made with the Court.[1] Again, no response to the Notice of Hearing, nor any other communication or correspondence was received by the Court.[2]

At the hearing on January 3, 2008, Margarita Hernandez, a member of Botanas La Poblanas, LLC, appeared without an attorney, thereby failing to comply with Rule 8(A) and the order of the Court in the Notice of Hearing issued on November 21, 2007.

ALC Rule 23(A) provides:

The administrative law judge may dismiss a contested case or dispose of a contested case adverse to the defaulting party. A default occurs when a party…fails to comply with any interlocutory order of the administrative law judge….

ALC Rule 23(B) further provides:

Upon motion of any party, or on its own motion, the Court may dismiss a contested case for failure to comply with any of the rules of procedure for contested cases….

The Court is constrained by the Rules of the ALC as well as applicable case law. Accordingly, Petitioner was not allowed to proceed pro se. Furthermore, Petitioner has been afforded ample time to secure counsel. “There is a limit beyond which the court should not allow a litigant to consume the time of the court. . . .” Georganne Apparel, Inc. v. Todd, 303 S.C. 87, 92, 399 S.E.2d 16, 19 (Ct. App. 1990). Accordingly,

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that this matter is dismissed. The Department’s Final Determination therefore stands as the final decision in this matter.[3]

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

__________________________________

January 4, 2008 Marvin F. Kittrell

Columbia, South Carolina Chief Administrative Law Judge



[1] Rule 8(A) was amended pursuant to the South Carolina Supreme Court’s decision in Rennaissance Enterprises, Inc. v. Summit Teleservices, Inc., 334 S.C. 649, 515 S.E.2d 257 (1999).

[2] The Court also sent a letter along with the Notice of Hearing further explaining the requirements of Rule 8(A).

[3] In the event that Margarita Hernandez chooses to file a new application for an on-premises beer and wine permit with the Department individually, and that matter proceeds to the ALC for a hearing, the Court will consider waiving the filing fee requirement of her request for a contested case hearing before this Court.


~/pdf/070505.pdf
PDF

Brown Bldg.

 

 

 

 

 

Copyright © 2024 South Carolina Administrative Law Court