ORDERS:
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
This matter comes before the Administrative Law Judge Division (Division)
pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. §§ 1-23-310 et seq. (1986 & Supp. 2002) and S.C. Code Ann.
§61-4-520 (Supp. 2002) and S.C. Code Ann. § 61-6-185 (Supp. 2002) for a contested case
hearing. The Petitioner, Ruth B. Simmons, seeks an on-premise beer and wine permit for the
location 536 Thomas Kate Rd., Columbia, South Carolina. The South Carolina Department of
Revenue (Department) set forth in the Agency Transmittal to the Division that it would have
issued the permit to the Petitioner but for the protest it received from a concerned citizen who
raised the issue of suitability of location. A hearing was held on March 6, 2003 at the offices of
the Division in Columbia, South Carolina. The sole Protestant, after receiving timely notice from
the Division, did not appear at the hearing and did not notify the Division that she would not be
appearing. The Petitioner was present at the hearing as was the Department.
After waiting approximately fifteen (15) minutes for the Protestant to appear, the Court
commenced this hearing. Upon Motion of the Respondent, the Division then dismissed this
action with prejudice under SC Code Ann. §61-4-525 (Supp. 2002) which states that, “If the
protestant, during the investigation expresses no desire to attend a contested hearing and offer
testimony, the protest is deemed invalid, and the department shall continue to process the
application and shall issue the permit if all other statutory requirements are met.” In addition,
Administrative Law Judge Division Rule 23 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 plead or otherwise prosecute or
defend, fails to appear at a hearing without the proper consent of
the judge or fails to comply with any interlocutory order of the
administrative law judge. Any non-defaulting party may move for
an order dismissing the case or terminating it adversely to the
defaulting party.
Because the Protestant did not appear before the Division, did not request a continuance,
and has not otherwise contacted this tribunal regarding this hearing as of the issuance of this
Order,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that the above-captioned case is dismissed with prejudice.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the Department resume processing the Petitioner's
application and issue an on-premise beer and wine permit to the Petitioner upon payment of the
proper fees and costs.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
_______________________________
CAROLYN C. MATTHEWS
Administrative Law Judge
March 10, 2003
Columbia, South Carolina. |
