2018 Ohio 2695
Oh. Ct. App. 10th Dist. Frankl...2018Background
- ECOT is an online community school that reported FTE (full-time equivalent) student counts to ODE for state funding; ODE audited and concluded ECOT substantially overstated FTE, yielding a $60,350,791 overpayment clawback.
- ECOT administratively appealed to a hearing officer whose recommended decision (reducing reported FTE to ~44.6% of ECOT’s figures) was adopted by the Ohio State Board of Education (BOE).
- ECOT filed multiple actions: (1) declaratory/injunctive action in common pleas court (now pending before Ohio Supreme Court), (2) an R.C. 119.12 appeal in Franklin County common pleas court from the BOE/ODE adjudication, and (3) a mandamus/prohibition petition to the Ohio Supreme Court (dismissed without opinion).
- The Franklin County common pleas court dismissed ECOT’s R.C. 119.12 appeal for lack of jurisdiction, reasoning R.C. 3314.08(K)(2)(d) labeled BOE decisions as "final" and thus not appealable under R.C. 119.12.
- The Tenth District majority reversed, holding ECOT may pursue a R.C. 119.12 appeal: the word "final" in R.C. 3314.08(K)(2)(d) can be harmonized with R.C. 119.12 by reading "final" to mean final within the agency (i.e., no further internal administrative review) but appealable to the common pleas court.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether BOE/ODE adjudication is appealable to common pleas under R.C. 119.12 | ECOT: BOE’s adoption of the hearing officer’s adjudication was a quasi-judicial "adjudication" and therefore appealable under R.C. 119.12 | BOE/ODE: statutory language in R.C. 3314.08(K)(2)(d) that BOE decisions are "final" means no appeal under R.C. 119.12; the specific statute controls over the general | Court: Reversed dismissal; "final" can be read to mean final administratively but still subject to R.C. 119.12 judicial review; remanded for full consideration under Chapter 119 |
| Whether ECOT has an adequate alternative remedy (mandamus/declaratory) barring R.C. 119.12 appeal | ECOT: alternative remedies have either been pursued (declaratory/injunctive) or dismissed (mandamus), so it should be allowed R.C. 119.12 review of the adjudication and clawback | BOE/ODE: insist the statutory scheme and precedent indicate mandamus or other remedies are appropriate instead of a R.C. 119.12 appeal | Court: Given procedural history and equipoise in precedent, ECOT is entitled to R.C. 119.12 review; dismissal for lack of jurisdiction reversed |
Key Cases Cited
- Brookwood Presbyterian Church v. Ohio Dep’t of Edn., 127 Ohio St.3d 469, 940 N.E.2d 1256 (2010) (statute labeling an agency determination "final" did not preclude R.C. 119.12 review where the same statute expressly provided for appealability)
- Carney v. School Emps. Retirement Sys. Bd., 39 Ohio App.3d 71, 528 N.E.2d 1322 (1988) (statute stating board determinations are "final" precluded R.C. 119.12 appeal; mandamus was proper remedy)
- State ex rel. Shumway v. State Teachers Retirement Bd., 114 Ohio App.3d 280, 683 N.E.2d 70 (1996) (court lacked jurisdiction to hear R.C. 119.12 appeal where statute provided board determinations "shall be final")
- State ex rel. Motor Carrier Serv. v. Rankin, 135 Ohio St.3d 395, 987 N.E.2d 670 (2013) (general v. specific statute canon and R.C. 1.51: reconcile provisions if possible; if irreconcilable, the specific prevails unless the general is later and shows manifest intent to prevail)