ORDERS:
ORDER OF DISMISSAL WITHOUT PREJUDICE
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
This is a contested case brought by the Petitioner pursuant to S.C. Code Ann. §§ 12-43-230, 12-43-232, and 12-60-2540
(Supp. 1999) and 27 S.C. Code Ann. Regs. 117-114 (Supp. 1999) concerning the property valuations of Parcel Nos. 293-05-01-016, 293-05-01-017, 293-05-01-018 and 292-00-03-004 for the 1999 tax year. The Petitioner exhausted his
prehearing remedies with the Oconee County Assessor and the Oconee County Board of Assessment Appeals (Board) and
sought a contested case hearing before the Administrative Law Judge Division (ALJD). A contested case hearing was held
on April 4, 2000, at the offices of the Administrative Law Judge Division in Columbia, South Carolina.
William M. Bryson, Jr. informed the ALJD that he is the treasurer and certified public accountant for EJ and WM, Inc.
However, at the commencement of this hearing, Mr. Bryson, apprised the ALJD that he was not going to proceed
represent the interest of EJ and WM because the South Carolina Attorney General's Office had informed him that he could
not represent this corporation in court. Throughout this proceeding Mr. Bryson has been the only person representing EJ
and WM, Inc.'s interests and no one else appeared on behalf of the corporation at the hearing.
At the hearing, Rule 9(A) of the ALJD Rules of Procedure (ALJDRP) was read into the record. Rule 9(A) entitled "Right
of Parties to Participate," sets forth, in relevant part:
Parties in a contested case have the right to participate or to be represented in all hearings or pre-hearing conferences
related to their case. A partnership, corporation or association may be represented by any member, officer, director or duly
authorized employee. An agency may be represented by the director, an official, or duly authorized employee of the
agency. Any party may be represented by an attorney admitted to practice, either permanently or pro hac vice, or as
otherwise authorized by law. In tax related cases, any party may be represented by a certified public accountant.
(Emphasis added). However, after being informed of the above Rule, Mr. Bryson still maintained that he would not
proceed with presenting a case for the Petitioner in this matter.
The party challenging an agency action has the burden of proving convincingly that the agency's decision is unsupported by
substantial evidence. Waters v. South Carolina Land Resources Conservation Comm'n, 321 S.C. 219, 467 S.E. 2d 913
(1996), citing Hamm v. AT&T, 302 S.C. 210, 394 S.E. 2d 842 (1994). Mr. Bryson, by filing an appeal of the Board's
decision with the Administrative Law Judge Division pursuant to S.C. Code Ann.12-60-2540 (Supp. 1999), bears the
burden of proof in this matter. See Hoffman v. County of Greenville, 242 S.C. 34, 39, 129 S.E.2d 757, 760 (1963) ("The
burden of proof is upon the party who by the pleadings has the affirmative on the issue. One who pleads an affirmative
defense has the burden of proving it." (internal citations omitted)); 2 Am.Jur.2d Administrative Law § 360 (1994)
("Generally, the burden of proof is on the party asserting the affirmative issue in an adjudicatory administrative
proceeding."); 73A C.J.S. Public Administrative Law and Procedure § 128 at 35 (1983) ("In administrative proceedings,
the general rule is that an applicant for relief, benefits, or a privilege has the burden of proof, and the burden of proof rests
upon one who files a claim with an administrative agency to establish that required conditions of eligibility have been met.
It is also a fundamental principle of administrative proceedings that the burden of proof is on the proponent of a rule or
order, or on the party asserting the affirmative of an issue."). By not presenting a case in the form of testimony or
evidence, EJ and WM, Inc. did not overcome its burden of proof.
Based on the foregoing and notwithstanding the relevant statute of limitations applicable to this case, I hereby ORDER that
this matter is dismissed without prejudice.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
______________________________
Ralph King Anderson, III
Administrative Law Judge
April 10, 2000
Columbia, S.C. |
