ORDERS:
ORDER OF DISMISSAL
On June 19, 2000, the South Carolina Department of Corrections (Department) filed a motion to dismiss this matter. The Department
moved to dismiss the Appellant's claim under SCRCP 12(b)(1), lack of jurisdiction over the claim; SCRCP 12(b)(6), failure of
Appellant to allege facts sufficient to state a claim; and Al-Shabazz v. State, 338 S.C. 354, 527 S.E.2d 742 (S.C. 2000).
A party cannot appeal a ruling unless he has been substantially aggrieved by that ruling. Bivens v. Knight, 254 S.C. 10, 173 S.E.2d 150
(1970); See also S.C. Code Ann. § 1-23-380(A) (judicial review available to parties who are aggrieved by a final decision of an
agency). A party who is aggrieved is one who "is injured in a legal sense; one who has suffered an injury to person or property." Bivens, 173 S.E.2d at 152, citing Parker v. Brown, 195 S.C. 35, 10 S.E.2d 625. The word "aggrieved" refers to a substantial
grievance, "a denial of some personal or property right or the imposition on a party of a burden or obligation." Id.
There is no evidence that the Appellant was substantially aggrieved by the actions of the Department in this grievance. The Appellant
filed this grievance because his food pass-through window is closed when not in use. However, according to policy, cell doors and
food pass-through flaps will remain closed and secured in the Special Management Unit (SMU) where Appellant is (was) housed. (1) Furthermore, the Department provided a copy of this policy as evidence.
I conclude that the Appellant was not substantially aggrieved by the final decision of the Department and that the Administrative Law
Judge Division has no jurisdiction over this appeal pursuant to SCRCP 12(b)(1).
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Respondent's Motion to Dismiss is granted and that this appeal of Mark Kennedy is hereby
dismissed.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
___________________________
Ralph King Anderson, III
Administrative Law Judge
August 8, 2000
Columbia, SC
APPEAL RIGHTS
You are entitled to appeal this final order of the Administrative Law Judge Division by filing a petition for judicial review in circuit
court within thirty (30) days after receipt of this order. S.C. Code Ann. § 1-23-610 (Supp. 1999). The petition may be filed in any
circuit court as long as the chosen forum is neither arbitrary nor unreasonable, and provided that no statute controls venue in a
particular type of case. The review of the administrative law judge's order must be confined to the record. The reviewing tribunal
may affirm the decision or remand the case for further proceedings; or it may reverse or modify the decision if the substantive rights of
the petitioner have been prejudiced because the finding, conclusion, or decision is: (a) in violation of constitutional or statutory
provisions; (b) in excess of the statutory authority of the agency; (c) made upon unlawful procedure; (d) affected by other error of law;
(e) clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative and substantial evidence on the whole record; or (f) arbitrary or capricious or
characterized by abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion.
1. The Appellant informed the Administrative Law Judge Division, via letter received on July 6, 2000, that he was moved to a new location. |
