McPartland v. SCDMV

CourtListener 10151915Scctapp9 giu 2021

Testo completo

THIS OPINION HAS NO PRECEDENTIAL VALUE. IT SHOULD NOT BE
CITED OR RELIED ON AS PRECEDENT IN ANY PROCEEDING
EXCEPT AS PROVIDED BY RULE 268(d)(2), SCACR.

THE STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA
In The Court of Appeals

John McPartland, Appellant,

v.

South Carolina Department of Motor Vehicles,
Respondent.

Appellate Case No. 2018-001305

Appeal From Richland County
DeAndrea G. Benjamin, Circuit Court Judge

Unpublished Opinion No. 2021-UP-202
Heard April 5, 2021 – Filed June 9, 2021

REVERSED and REMANDED

Thomas Micah Leddy, of The Leddy Law Firm, of
Columbia, for Appellant.

Brandy Anne Duncan, of Blythewood, for Respondent.

PER CURIAM: John McPartland brought an action against the South Carolina
Department of Motor Vehicles (SCDMV) to reinstate his South Carolina driver's
license. The SCDMV suspended his license after a background check revealed
New York State Department of Motor Vehicles (NYSDMV) had revoked
McPartland's driving privileges. He appeals the circuit court's determination that
he failed to exhaust his administrative remedies in New York. We reverse and
remand.

Because the revocation of McPartland's New York driving privileges was the basis
upon which South Carolina suspended his license, McPartland petitioned the
NYSDMV to reinstate his New York driving privileges. After reviewing
McPartland's request, the Driver Improvement Bureau (the Bureau) of the
NYSDMV declined to reinstate his New York driving privileges. McPartland
followed the necessary administrative procedures and timely appealed the Bureau's
denial to the NYSDMV Appeals Board (Appeals Board). The Appeals Board
affirmed the Bureau's denial of McPartland's petition and informed McPartland:
"This is a final administrative determination of the Department. Any further
appeal of an adverse decision should be made to the New York State Supreme
Court pursuant to [a]rticle 78 of the Civil Practice Law and Rules [CPLR]."
McPartland did not initiate a judicial action in the New York courts to seek review
of the NYSDMV's final administrative determination.

Because McPartland did exhaust his NYSDMV administrative remedies, our
circuit court's conclusion—that McPartland failed to exhaust his administrative
remedies in New York—was an abuse of discretion. Accordingly, we reverse and
remand pursuant to Rule 220(b), SCACR, and the following authorities: Hyde v.
S.C. Dep't of Mental Health, 314 S.C. 207, 208, 442 S.E.2d 582, 582-83 (1994)
("Whether administrative remedies must be exhausted is a matter within the
[circuit court's] sound discretion and [its] decision will not be disturbed on appeal
absent an abuse thereof."); Tri-Cty. Ice & Fuel Co. v. Palmetto Ice Co., 303 S.C.
237, 242, 399 S.E.2d 779, 782 (1990) ("An abuse of discretion arises [when] the
[circuit court] was controlled by an error of law or where [its] order is based on
factual conclusions that are without evidentiary support."); Acevedo v. N.Y. State
Dep't of Motor Vehicles, 77 N.E.3d 331, 338 (N.Y. 2017) ("As a general matter,
once an offender's license has been revoked—permanently or otherwise—
reissuance of a new license is subject to the discretion of the [NYSDMV].");
Bainton v. N.Y. Dep't of Motor Vehicles, 116 N.Y.S.3d 428, 429 (N.Y. App. Div.
2020) ("Pursuant to [New York] Vehicle and Traffic Law § 263, a party
challenging a determination by the [Driver Improvement] Bureau must first
exhaust all administrative remedies before commencing a proceeding pursuant to
CPLR article 78."); Mayeri v. Comm'r of New York State Dep't of Motor
Vehicles, 143 N.Y.S.3d 442, 443 (N.Y. App. Div. 2021) ("At the time petitioner
commenced this CPLR article 78 proceeding, his appeal of the administrative
determination upholding the suspension of his driving privileges was still pending
before the Appeals Board. Therefore, no final determination had been rendered
with respect thereto such that Supreme Court appropriately determined that he had
failed to exhaust his administrative remedies, precluding CPLR article 78
review.").

REVERSED AND REMANDED.

KONDUROS, GEATHERS, and MCDONALD, JJ., concur.

Continua la tua ricerca in ChatGPT o Claude

Collega Omnilex per cercare nel corpus legale dal tuo assistente IA.