2011 Ohio 4262
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Appellant Daniel Cord challenges a City of Cleveland civil traffic liability issued under C.C.O. 413.031 for speeding 48 mph in a 35 mph zone on Chester Ave.
- Notice of liability issued June 9, 2009; $100 civil fine and hearing right provided.
- Hearing held July 9, 2009 before the Parking Violations Bureau; officer who issued/reviewed the notice not present for cross-examination.
- Administrative appeal filed under R.C. 2506.01; common pleas court affirmed, finding facial challenges like constitutional arguments improper in administrative review.
- Appellant argued due process deficiencies and ability to subpoena witnesses; court rejected due to R.C. 2506.03 avenues and lack of record supplementation; judgment affirmed.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the hearing evidence standards violated due process | Cord argues evidence rules violated due process and officer testimony should be cross-examined | City contends administrative hearings use relaxed evidentiary standards and no cross-examination required | No error; evidence deemed probative and substantial in admin context |
| WhetherCord could supplement the record under R.C. 2506.03 | Cord asserts inability to subpoena and supplement records violated due process | City contends no obligation to allow supplementation beyond hearing | Cord had avenue under 2506.03 but did not pursue subpoenas; no due process violation affirmed |
| Whether facial constitutional challenges to the ordinance are reviewable | Cord framed challenges as constitutional defects in the ordinance | City argues facial challenges are not properly reviewable in admin appeal | Facial challenges not reviewable in administrative appeal; overruled as to these aspects |
| Whether the Parking Violations Bureau lacked jurisdiction | Cord contends PVB duties conflict with enabling statutes | City says issue is facial and unsupported in admin review | Facial jurisdiction challenges not proper in admin appeal; overruled |
Key Cases Cited
- Simon v. Lake Geauga Printing Co., 69 Ohio St.2d 41 (Ohio Supreme Court 1982) (admissibility of evidence in admin proceedings; hearsay permitted)
- Our Place, Inc. v. Ohio Liquor Control Comm., 63 Ohio St.3d 570 (Ohio 1992) (definition of reliable, probative, substantial administrative evidence)
- HCMC, Inc. v. Ohio Dept. of Job & Family Servs., 179 Ohio App.3d 707 (Ohio App. 2008) (administrative audit as prima facie evidence; relaxed evidentiary standards)
- Cleveland v. Posner, 188 Ohio App.3d 421 (Ohio App. 2010) (administrative review standards; abuse of discretion standard)
- Posner II, 2011-Ohio-1370 (Ohio App. 2011) (due process rights; ability to supplement record under 2506.03)
- Posner III, 2011-Ohio-3071 (Ohio App. 2011) (reaffirmed due process via 2506.03 supplementation)