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:
SCDOR vs. Wild Cat Post 3447 VFW, d/b/a VFW Post 3447

AGENCY:
South Carolina Department of Revenue

PARTIES:
Petitioners:
South Carolina Department of Revenue

Respondents:
Wild Cat Post 3447 VFW, d/b/a VFW Post 3447
 
DOCKET NUMBER:
08-ALJ-17-0165-CC

APPEARANCES:
n/a
 

ORDERS:

CONSENT ORDER OF DISMISSAL

This matter is before the Administrative Law Court (“ALC” or “Court”) pursuant to a request for a contested case hearing filed by the Respondent on April 3, 2008.[1] After timely notice to the parties, a hearing was scheduled for May 27, 2008 at the offices of the ALC in Columbia, South Carolina. At the beginning of the hearing, counsel for Petitioner and Respondent informed the Court that they had reached an agreement in this matter and submitted a Consent Agreement into the record for the Court’s consideration. Further, counsel for both parties requested that this matter be dismissed. Accordingly, the Consent Order is incorporated herein by reference, and

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-captioned case is dismissed with prejudice.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

______________________________________

Marvin F. Kittrell

Chief Judge

July 31, 2008

Columbia, South Carolina


[1] Because this contested case involves the imposition of penalties by the Department, the Department bears the burden of proof and is therefore considered the Petitioner, even though this matter was actually initiated by Respondent Wild Cat Post 3447 VFW, d/b/a VFW Post 3447. See ALC Rule 29(B) (“In matters involving the assessment of civil penalties, the imposition of sanctions, or the enforcement of administrative orders, the agency shall have the burden of proof.”); Stephen P. Bates, The Contested Case Before the ALJD, in South Carolina Administrative Practice & Procedure 161, 201 (Randolph R. Lowell & Stephen P. Bates eds., 2004) (“In some cases, to highlight that the burden lies with the agency, the caption is changed to reflect that the agency is the Petitioner and the party subject to the enforcement is the Respondent, despite the fact that it is the now-Respondent that filed the Request for a Contested Case Hearing.”).

~/pdf/080165.pdf
PDF

Brown Bldg.

Office of Motor Vehicle Hearings

 

 

 

 

 

Copyright © 2024 South Carolina Administrative Law Court