ORDERS:
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
This
matter comes before the Administrative Law Court pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. §§
1‑23‑310 et seq. (1986 & Supp. 2005) and S.C. Code Ann. §§
38-43-100 and 38-43-130 (Supp. 2005) for a contested case hearing. The
Petitioner, South Carolina Department of Insurance, sought to revoke the
respondent’s resident insurance producer’s license due to the respondent’s
conviction for crimes of moral turpitude. After proper notice to the parties,
a hearing was held on May 4, 2006 at the Court in Columbia, South Carolina.
Counsel for the Petitioner was present at the hearing as noted. After waiting
approximately fifteen (15) minutes for the Respondent to appear, the Court
commenced this hearing and finds that the Petitioner shall revoke the
Respondent’s resident insurance producer’s license.
FINDINGS OF FACT AND CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
Having carefully
considered all testimony, exhibits, and arguments presented at the hearing of
this matter, and taking into account the credibility and accuracy of the
evidence, I make the following findings of fact by a preponderance of the
evidence:
1. Notice of
the time, date and place of hearing was provided to all parties as required by
ALC Rule 15.
2. At the call
of the case, Counsel for the Petitioner was present, but the Respondent was
not.
3. The
Petitioner introduced certified copies of Respondent’s ten (10) convictions in
Richland County, South Carolina for crimes which are crimes of moral turpitude,
including forgery, obtaining money under false pretenses and issuing a fraudulent
check.
4. Under the
terms of S.C. Code Ann. §38-43-130 (A) the Department may revoke a producer’s
license when it appears that the producer has been convicted of a crime of
moral turpitude. I find that the Department has met its burden of proof and
that the Respondent has been convicted of several crimes of moral turpitude.
5. In addition,
under SC ALC Rule 23,
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. (Emphasis added.)
I find that the
Respondent has defaulted in this matter, and that the Department is entitled to
the relief sought.
THEREFORE, IT IS
ORDERED, that the Department of Insurance’s decision to revoke the
Respondent’s insurance producer’s license due to his convictions for crimes of
moral turpitude is upheld and the Respondent’s license is revoked.
AND IT IS SO
ORDERED.
___________________________________
CAROLYN C. MATTHEWS
Administrative Law Judge
May 19, 2006
Columbia, South Carolina
|
