Elam v. Cuyahoga Cty. Dept. of Emp. & Family Servs.
2011 Ohio 3588
Ohio Ct. App.2011Background
- Elam applied for and received a Type B daycare certificate in 2001, allowing care for up to six children in her home.
- In 2009, EFS attempted an unannounced inspection; attempts to contact Elam were made using an outdated number, and an unannounced visit was aborted due to a loose dog.
- EFS issued a notice revoking Elam’s certificate on November 5, 2009, citing failure to cooperate with inspections and lack of a working telephone line.
- At the administrative review, EFS personnel asserted the incorrect phone number contributed to scheduling failures and discussed Elam’s past inspection history and dog presence.
- Elam provided multiple documents showing EFS had her correct phone number since 2007, and the line was repaired after damage caused by a dog in November 2009.
- The trial court affirmed the revocation, but this court found the revocation arbitrary and unsupported by substantial evidence and reversed and remanded.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether revocation was supported by substantial evidence | Elam | EFS | Revocation not supported; arbitrary and not based on proper evidence. |
| Whether failure to contact due to outdated number was valid basis | Elam | EFS | Invalid basis; EFS records showed correct number; cannot rely on contact failure. |
| Whether prior noncompliance facts justified revocation | Elam | EFS | Incorrect; past noncompliance cannot substitute for lack of cooperation. |
| Whether evidence about the dog and phone line supported revocation | Elam | EFS | No; dog was not shown to be a threat and phone line was repaired timely. |
Key Cases Cited
- Lorain City School Dist. Bd. of Edn. v. State Emp. Relations Bd., 40 Ohio St.3d 257 (1988) (precedent on scope of appellate review and substantial evidence)
- Blakemore v. Blakemore, 5 Ohio St.3d 217 (1983) (abuse of discretion standard for reviewing agency decisions)
- Crawford-Cole v. Lucas Cty. Dept. of Job & Family Servs., 121 Ohio St.3d 560 (2009) (county-level regulation of Type B daycare; applicability of state-level analogies)