The
authority for the actions requested is granted by statute. S.C. Code Ann
Section 40-1-210 ("The department [of Labor, Licensing and Regulation], .
. ., may institute a civil action through the Administrative Law [Court], . . .
, for injunctive relief against a person violating this article, a regulation
promulgated under this article, or an order of the board [and in such action] .
. . the administrative law judge may impose a fine of no more than ten thousand
dollars."); Section 40-3-100 ("[T]he board in accordance with Section
40-1-100 also . . . may petition an administrative law judge for a temporary
restraining order or other equitable relief to enjoin a violation of this
chapter.").
II. Analysis
To
exercise the authority to grant an injunction or other equitable relief as well
as to impose a fine, the existence of "a violation" must be
established. More particularly, the violation can be of either chapter 3 of
Title 40 or of "an order of the board." S.C. Code Ann. Section
40-1-210. Further, the violation can also be of chapter 1 of Title 40. S.C.
Code Ann. Section 40-3-100.
Here,
violations have been established since Langbehn has engaged in the practice of
architecture without a license.
The law
is quite settled that "[n]o individual may engage in the practice of
architecture without a license issued in accordance with this chapter [3 of
Title 40]." S.C. Code Ann. Section 40-3-30(A). The practice of
architecture "means a service or creative work requiring architectural
education, training, and experience and the application of the principles of
architecture and related technical disciplines to the professional services or
creative work as consulting, evaluating, planning, designing, specifying,
coordinating of consultants, administration of contracts, and reviewing of
construction for the purpose of assuring compliance with the specifications and
design, in connection with a building or site development." S.C. Code
Ann. Section 40-3-20(6).
Here,
Langbehn's license was suspended for six months by the Board's Order of
September 30, 2003. Further, even after that period, the license could not be
reinstated until Langbehn completed 24 hours of "code related continuing
education." Langbehn failed to compete the 24 hours needed for
reinstatement and no reinstatement was issued. Thus, if Langbehn has operated
as an architect while his license has been suspended, he has performed such
duties without a license and is in violation of S.C. Code Ann. Section
40-3-30(A). Several violations occurred.
For
example, on or about October 2, 2003, Langbehn submitted to the Planning and
Development Department of the City of Seneca the design documents for the
Thomas Heights Baptist Church. Submitting for approval and creating design
documents is the practice of architecture. See Verich v. Florida State
Bd. of Architecture, 239 So.2d 29 (Fla.App. 4th Dist.1970)
(there Florida law similar to South Carolina's was interpreted to hold that
"[t]he planning or design for the erection of buildings for others is the
practice of "architecture.").
Similarly,
on or about April 26, 2004, and while still under suspension, Langbehn
submitted to the Oconee County Building Department the design documents for St.
Mark Baptist Church in Westminster seeking to obtain a permit. The documents
contained Langbehn's seal and signature and identified him as the architect.
