Huntsman v. State
2017 Ohio 2622
| Ohio Ct. App. | 2017Background
- Cynthia Huntsman operated Stump Hill Farm and possessed animals classified under Ohio’s Dangerous Wild Animal Act (DWA). The ODA asserted she lacked the required DWA permit despite her earlier ODNR permit under R.C. 1533.08.
- In March–May 2016 the ODA issued a quarantine, obtained a search warrant, and executed an administrative transfer order removing several animals from Huntsman’s property; Huntsman appealed administratively and sought a temporary restraining order in common pleas court obtaining temporary relief.
- The Ohio Supreme Court issued a peremptory writ in State ex rel. Director, Ohio Dept. of Agriculture v. Forchione, holding the ODA has exclusive authority to enforce the DWA and that the trial court lacked jurisdiction to order return of seized animals.
- Huntsman then filed a separate declaratory-judgment complaint in Stark County seeking a ruling that her ODNR permit exempted her from the DWA (and constitutional takings/due-process relief) and asked for return of the animals.
- The ODA and State moved to dismiss under Civ.R. 12(B)(1) and (6), arguing exclusive administrative jurisdiction under the DWA, that declaratory relief cannot bypass the statutory administrative scheme, and that Huntsman failed to exhaust administrative remedies.
- The trial court granted dismissal; the Fifth District affirmed, holding Forchione controls, the administrative scheme is the exclusive remedy, and declaratory relief / judicial review was premature and improper absent exhaustion.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether common pleas court has subject-matter jurisdiction to declare Huntsman exempt from the DWA and order return of animals | Huntsman: R.C. 2721.03 allows a declaratory judgment; her ODNR permit makes DWA inapplicable so court may decide statutory construction | ODA/State: Forchione establishes ODA’s exclusive authority; R.C. Chapter 935 provides the special administrative remedy; court lacks jurisdiction | Court: Dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction; Forchione is dispositive — ODA has exclusive authority |
| Whether a declaratory-judgment action may be used to resolve exemption when an administrative procedure exists | Huntsman: declaratory relief is proper to interpret statute and need not be bypassing administrative process | ODA/State: Declaratory relief cannot be used to bypass a special statutory proceeding; R.C. 2721.02/03 cannot extend jurisdiction | Court: Declaratory action is improper because it would circumvent the special statutory administrative process |
| Whether Huntsman’s constitutional takings/due-process claims can be heard in common pleas before exhausting administrative remedies | Huntsman: constitutional claims need not be presented to agency because there is no mechanism to challenge exemption | ODA/State: As-applied constitutional claims require factual development; must be raised administratively first | Court: Dismissed for failure to exhaust administrative remedies; constitutional claims are as-applied and must be developed in administrative process |
| Separation of powers challenge to administrative exclusivity | Huntsman: judicial review is improperly precluded, raising separation-of-powers concerns | ODA/State: Legislature vested enforcement/review in administrative scheme with judicial review through R.C. 119 | Court: Argument waived below and unpersuasive; administrative scheme provides judicial review consistent with separation of powers |
Key Cases Cited
- State ex rel. Director, Ohio Dept. of Agriculture v. Forchione, 69 N.E.3d 636 (Ohio 2016) (ODA has exclusive authority to implement and enforce the DWA; trial court lacked jurisdiction to order return of seized animals)
- Greeley v. Miami Valley Maintenance Contractors Inc., 551 N.E.2d 981 (Ohio 1990) (standard of review on Civ.R. 12(B) motions; de novo review)
- Byrd v. Faber, 565 N.E.2d 584 (Ohio 1991) (pleading and inference standards for Civ.R. 12(B)(6) dismissal)
- Fairview General Hospital v. Fletcher, 586 N.E.2d 80 (Ohio 1992) (declaratory relief inappropriate where administrative remedy must be exhausted)
- Wilkins v. Daniels, 744 F.3d 409 (6th Cir. 2014) (upheld constitutionality of DWA against certain challenges)