 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Professional Standards Commission v. Valentine8/27/2004
al Decision by the ; and 4) the harsher sanction is arbitrary and capricious violating [Valentine's] rights.
In considering Valentine's petition, however, the superior court ruled that:
the record contains no finding that [Valentine's conduct] seriously impaired Mr. Valentine's ability to function professionally or that the conduct was detrimental to the health, welfare, discipline, or morals of students. . . . The Commission must do more than simply find that an event occurred; it must find a consequence to the event that affects students and that the conduct was unethical.
(Punctuation omitted.) The PSC now appeals the superior court's ruling.
In deciding this matter, we must be mindful of our standard of review. With regard to the findings of an administrative agency,
he reviewing courts may reject those findings only if they are clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record; or arbitrary or capricious or characterized by abuse of discretion or clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion. OCGA § 50-13-19 (h) (5), (6); Dept. of Community Health &c; v. Gwinnett Hosp. System. Our duty is not to review whether the record supports the superior court's decision but whether the record supports the final decision of the administrative agency. (Citation and punctuation omitted.) Sawyer v. Reheis. Moreover, the superior courts cannot substitute their judgment for that of the hearing officer as to the weight of the evidence on questions of fact. Emory Univ. v. Levitas.
(Punctuation omitted.) Douglas Asphalt Co. v. Ga. Public Svc. Comm. In cases such as this, the decision of the administrative agency must be affirmed if there is any evidence of record to support it.
Viewed in this light, there is some evidence of record supporting the PSC's determination that Valentine violated Standard 10 of the Code of Ethics by acting in an unprofessional manner. As an initial matter, Valentine did not dispute the ALJ's finding that he violated Standard 10 prior to the PSC's final decision. To the contrary, he admitted that he had done so. In addition, the record supports a finding that Valentine acted unprofessionally. He had two heated altercations on school grounds in which he admittedly cursed and threatened physical violence. Valentine further admits that, at the time of his altercations, he was having emotional problems resulting in uncontrolled angry outbursts. These outbursts ultimately required both medication and counseling.
This evidence supports the finding by both the ALJ and the PSC that Valentine violated Standard 10, as such behavior forms a clear basis on which one could rationally conclude that Valentine's angry behavior seriously impaired his ability to function professionally as an educator. Therefore, as some evidence supports the PSC's conclusion that Valentine violated Standard 10, we must reverse the ruling of the superior court holding otherwise.
Judgment reversed. Barnes and Mikell, JJ., concur.
Page 1 2 3 Georgia DUI Attorneys
DUI Lawyers
|
| |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|