ORDERS:
ORDER GRANTING MOTION TO DISMISS
Grievance No. RCI-0390-99
I. Introduction
This matter is one in which Michael Anthony Hunter (Hunter) alleges acts of negligence have been
committed by employees of the South Carolina Department of Corrections (DOC). Specifically, Hunter
asserts that actions of DOC employees caused a water accumulation which damaged Hunter's television set.
Such an allegation sounds in tort and raises the issue of whether subject matter jurisdiction resides in the
Administrative Law Judge Division (ALJD). After reviewing the allegations and arguments, this matter
must be dismissed.
II. Analysis
Pursuant to and as limited by Al-Shabazz v. State, 338 S.C. 354, 527 S.E.2d 742 (2000), an inmate is
entitled to a modified contested case hearing when the inmate "challenges a disciplinary outcome,
calculation of sentence-related credits, custody status, or other condition of imprisonment." Al-Shabazz v.
State at 338 S.C. at 375. That modified contested case hearing is held before a DOC employee since the
"Department's procedures provide a sufficient method of resolving administrative matters pertaining to
inmates without the need for a contested-case hearing before an ALJ." Al-Shabazz v. State at 338 S.C. at 376.
Al-Shabazz further explained that an ALJD appellate review is available for inmates dissatisfied with the
outcome of the modified contested case hearing. Al-Shabazz v. State at 338 S.C. at 376 - 377. Therefore, it
follows, an ALJD appellate review is available only for those matters in which a modified contested case
could have been granted, i.e., one in which an inmate "challenges a disciplinary outcome, calculation of
sentence-related credits, custody status, or other condition of imprisonment."
Here, Hunter does not challenge a disciplinary outcome, calculation of sentence-related credits, custody
status, or other condition of imprisonment. Rather, Hunter seeks money damages for alleged negligence
committed by DOC. No contested case and thus no jurisdiction for an appellate review is available here.
Rather, a forum other than the ALJD must be sought when an inmate alleges negligent actions by a state
agency. See South Carolina Tort Claims Act, see §§ 15-78-10 et seq.
III. Order
The appeal of Michael Anthony Hunter's grievance to the ALJD must be dismissed since the ALJD has no
jurisdiction to review tort claims alleging negligence by DOC. Thus, this matter is dismissed and the appeal ended.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
____________________________
RAY N. STEVENS
Administrative Law Judge
Dated: March 28, 2001
Columbia, South Carolina |
