John T. Impey v. Missouri Ethics Commission
2014 Mo. LEXIS 157
| Mo. | 2014Background
- Impey circulated pamphlets opposing a ballot measure; MEC received a complaint about disclosure on the pamphlets.
- MEC investigated under § 105.961, filed a report, and found probable cause to believe a violation occurred.
- MEC held a probable cause hearing and issued findings of fact, conclusions of law, and an order to collect a $100 fee.
- MEC notified Impey that appeals go to the AHC under § 105.961(5); Impey filed a petition for review in circuit court instead.
- Circuit court dismissed the petition for failure to exhaust administrative remedies; Impey appealed arguing § 105.961 violates Art. V, § 18.
- Court holds § 105.961 is constitutional and Impey failed to exhaust administrative remedies, so circuit court’s dismissal stands.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether § 105.961 violates Art. V, § 18 direct review. | Impey argues AHC review before circuit court violates direct review. | MEC argues AHC review is not an intervening step and is required. | No direct-review violation; AHC review is the final step in the process. |
| Whether MEC's decision was final and subject to direct review. | Impey claims MEC's order is final and not subject to AHC review. | MEC's language and structure show review by AHC is part of the final decision. | AHC review is contemplated; MEC's decision is not final until AHC review concludes. |
| Whether Impey exhausted administrative remedies under § 536.100. | Impey did not pursue AHC review. | Exhaustion required because § 105.961 provides AHC review. | Impey failed to exhaust; circuit court was correct to dismiss. |
| Whether the MEC's preliminary finding of probable cause is reviewable after exhaustion. | Impey seeks judicial review of probable cause. | Exhaustion prevents review absent AHC determination. | After exhaustion, judicial review limited; cannot challenge probable cause without AHC review. |
Key Cases Cited
- Asbury v. Lombardi, 846 S.W.2d 196 (Mo. banc 1993) (direct review requirement as to final agency decisions)
- J.C. Nichols Co. v. Dir. of Revenue, 796 S.W.2d 16 (Mo. banc 1990) (AHC as hearing officer in disputes between agencies and parties)
- Legends Bank v. State, 361 S.W.3d 383 (Mo. banc 2012) (amendment unconstitutional; original purpose rule)
- State v. Honeycutt, 421 S.W.3d 410 (Mo. banc 2013) (de novo review for constitutionality)