 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Dashiell v. Maryland State Department of Health and Mental Hygiene. Daniel Coles6/23/1992
the Secretary's finding was not supported by substantial evidence in light of the entire record. In each case, it was the Secretary's finding that the employees were aware, because of having received a copy of the substance abuse policy, that the Direct Care Assistant II position would be classified as sensitive at some future time. There was, however, no evidence, or any inferences that could be properly drawn therefrom, from which it could be properly concluded that both employees realized that the Direct Care Assistant II position would subsequently be classified as sensitive and that, as a result, their employment would be automatically terminated for conduct occurring prior to the actual designation of the position as sensitive. Dashiell testified that she had no knowledge that the job would be classified as sensitive. Similarly, Coles testified that he had no such knowledge at the time of his arrest.
We recently reiterated " n determining whether an agency's decision is supported by substantial evidence, we are mindful that substantial evidence is such relevant evidence as a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion." Caucus v. Maryland Securities, 320 Md. 313, 324, 577 A.2d 783 (1990), citing State Election Bd. v. Billhimer, 314 Md. 46, 548 A.2d 819 (1988). We have also described the substantial evidence standard in terms of "whether 'a reasoning mind could have reached the factual conclusion the agency reached.'" Lumbermen's Mut. Casualty v. Ins. Comm'r, 302 Md. 248, 266, 487 A.2d 271 (1985). As we see it, the Secretary's decisions lack any evidentiary support and thus were essentially arbitrary and
capricious; no reasoning mind could have reached the Secretary's conclusion.
JUDGMENTS OF THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR WICOMICO COUNTY REVERSED; CASES REMANDED TO THAT COURT WITH DIRECTIONS TO VACATE THE ORDERS OF THE SECRETARY OF PERSONNEL; COSTS TO BE PAID BY APPELLEE.
Disposition
JUDGMENTS OF THE CIRCUIT COURT FOR WICOMICO COUNTY REVERSED; CASES REMANDED TO THAT COURT WITH DIRECTIONS TO VACATE THE ORDERS OF THE SECRETARY OF PERSONNEL; COSTS TO BE PAID BY APPELLEE.
Page 1 2 3 4 Maryland DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|