2016-UP-376
S.C. Ct. App.Jul 19, 2016Background
- Lake City College Preparatory Academy (Lake City) appealed the Administrative Law Court's (ALC) affirmation of the South Carolina Public Charter School District Board's May 2014 decision to revoke Lake City's charter under the South Carolina Charter Schools Act of 1996.
- The District based revocation on statutory grounds in S.C. Code Ann. § 59-40-110(C) (material violations, inadequate pupil achievement progress, fiscal mismanagement, or legal violations).
- Lake City raised multiple challenges including statutory timeliness, due process (claiming the sponsor acted as both accuser and adjudicator), Board quorum and bias, abuse of discretion, inadequate opportunity to remedy, and challenges to funding cuts and stay rules during appeal.
- The ALC found the revocation complied with statutory procedures, the Board had a quorum, Lake City received meaningful opportunity to remedy deficiencies, and no due process violation occurred.
- The Court of Appeals reviewed the ALC's factual findings for substantial evidence and affirmed the ALC's decision in all material respects.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Lawfulness of revocation under §59-40-110(C) | Revocation was improper/unsupported by evidence | Sponsor properly found statutory grounds for revocation | Affirmed: substantial evidence supports revocation |
| Sponsor as accuser and adjudicator (due process) | §59-40-110(C) unconstitutional; sponsor performed investigative/prosecutorial and adjudicative roles | Board members adjudicating did not perform investigative/prosecutorial functions or form premature opinions | Rejected: no due process violation; no improper combination of roles |
| Timeliness of revocation procedure under §59-40-110(D) | Notice and hearing were untimely | Notice and hearing met statutory timing requirements | Affirmed: hearing was timely under the Act |
| Quorum, bias, and arbitrary/capricious decision | Board lacked quorum and acted with bias; decision was arbitrary | Board had a lawful quorum; decision based on evidence and not arbitrary | Affirmed: quorum existed; decision was not arbitrary, capricious, or abuse of discretion |
Key Cases Cited
- Olson v. S.C. Dep't of Health & Envtl. Control, 379 S.C. 57 (Ct. App.) (ALC findings reviewed for substantial evidence)
- Ross v. Med. Univ. of S.C., 328 S.C. 51 (S.C.) (Article I, §22 due process impartiality principles)
- Garris v. Governing Bd. of S.C. Reinsurance Facility, 333 S.C. 432 (S.C.) (prohibition on combining prosecutorial and adjudicative roles)
- S.C. Ambulatory Surgery Ctr. Ass'n v. S.C. Workers' Comp. Comm'n, 389 S.C. 380 (S.C.) (due process in administrative context under Article I, §22)
- Deese v. S.C. State Bd. of Dentistry, 286 S.C. 182 (Ct. App.) (definition of arbitrary decision)
- Edwards v. State Law Enf't Div., 395 S.C. 571 (S.C.) (prospective vs. retroactive statutory construction)