 |
 |
to fill out a simple form to connect to DUI Lawyers in your area.
|
|
|
|
|
Carmack v. Caltrider10/21/2005
appeal the BMV's suspension in court.
{ } We also note that only the courts of common pleas are vested with jurisdiction to hear appeals from the actions of administrative agencies. R.C. 119.12 states that " ny party adversely affected by an order of an agency issued pursuant to an adjudication * revoking or suspending a license * may appeal from the order of the agency to the court of common pleas of the * county in which the licensee is a resident *." As such, the municipal court would have lacked jurisdiction to hear an appeal of Carmack's suspension even if he had exhausted his administrative remedies.
{ } The BMV further correctly points out that Carmack failed to appeal within the time prescribed by R.C. 119.12.
{ } Finally, we acknowledge that there may, in fact, have been a clerical error in this case which provided Carmack with a legitimate basis to challenge the BMV's suspension. It is unfortunate that he did not use the appropriate mechanism to advance his arguments in this regard. It may be that the BMV might grant Carmack relief from the license suspension should the municipal court document to the BMV's satisfaction the clerical error the court claims to have made. It is clear, however, that the municipal court lacked jurisdiction to grant such relief.
{ } The assignments of error are sustained.
{ } The order of the municipal court vacating the suspension will be reversed.
GRADY, J. and DONOVAN, J., concur.
|