ORDERS:
RESTRAINING ORDER
The State Board of Cosmetology (Board) determined that the Respondent was operating a business performing cosmetology services for the public without a license or a cosmetology salon license. After giving the Respondent ample notice and opportunity to present her position in this matter, the Board issued a Cease and Desist Order to Respondent on June 11, 1998, under authority of S. C. Code Ann. §§ 40-13-260(b) (Supp. 1997) and 40-1-100 (Supp. 1997). That Order, which was served on June 13, 1998, commanded Respondent to cease and desist from the unlicensed practice of cosmetology. Respondent informed Petitioner that she refused to comply with the Cease and Desist Order on the grounds that, among other things, her sole service was African hair braiding.
After Respondent failed to comply with the Cease and Desist Order, Petitioner filed a Complaint for Injunctive Relief and Civil Penalties with the Administrative Law Judge Division on October 5, 1998, seeking to enjoin Respondent from engaging in the practice of unlicensed cosmetology and the aiding and abetting of unlicensed practice of cosmetology in this State. A hearing was held concerning that matter on October 19, 1998. Based on the arguments presented at that hearing, I temporarily enjoined the Respondent from engaging in African hair braiding at her place of business until such time as a final hearing could be scheduled to determine the final disposition of this matter. A final hearing was held before the Administrative Law Judge Division on January 12, 1999. However, though the Respondent was properly notified of the hearing, she failed to attend. Nevertheless, I incorporate the arguments she made at the October 19, 1998 hearing into this Order.
ANALYSIS
Respondent contends that African hair braiding does not fall within the scope of the practice of cosmetology and therefore does not require her to have a license. Petitioner argues that African hair braiding falls within the statutory definition of "cosmetology" in that said service involves some or all of the following activities: "arranging, styling, thermal curling, chemical waving, pressing, shampooing, cutting, shaping, chemical bleaching, chemical coloring, chemical relaxing, or similar work, upon the hair, wig, or hairpiece of any person, by any means, with hands or mechanical or electrical apparatus or appliances." S.C. Code Ann. §40-13-20(2)(a) (Act. No. 427, 1998 S.C. Acts.).
The jurisdiction of an Administrative Law Judge to hear matters of the Boards that fall under the authority of the South Carolina Department of Labor, Licensing, and Regulation, is appellate jurisdiction. More specifically, the Administrative Law Judge may hear a petition from the Board of Cosmetology for a temporary restraining order or other equitable relief to enjoin a violation of a Cease and Desist Order issued by the Board. S. C. Code Ann. § 40-13-100. An injunction is a proper remedy to prevent the violation of statutes regulating businesses or professions in which a license is required. Any doubt concerning the necessity for an injunction to safeguard the public interest should ordinarily be resolved in favor of the grant of relief. 43A C.J.S. Injunctions § 133a (1978); see South Carolina Medical Malpractice Joint Underwriting Ass’n v. Froelich, 297 S.C. 400, 377 S.E.2d 306 (1989) (out-of-state attorney enjoined from engaging in the unauthorized practice of law in South Carolina).
Based upon the evidence and testimony previously presented, the Court finds that the Respondent is performing "cosmetology" at her African hair braiding establishment because her business involves the "arranging and styling of hair." S.C. Code Ann. § 40-13-20(2)(a)(Act No. 427, 1998 S.C. Acts). Therefore, Respondent and her employees are engaged in the unlicensed practice of cosmetology.
ORDER
Based upon the above analysis, it is hereby:
ORDERED that the Respondent and her employees are hereby permanently enjoined from engaging in African hair braiding at Respondent’s place of business.
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
_______________________________
Ralph King Anderson, III
Administrative Law Judge
April 16, 1999
Columbia, South Carolina
|
