In the case of Hal v. State Dep’t of Educ., 10th Dist. Franklin No. 18AP-301, 2019-Ohio-5081, an Ohio appellate court held that a reviewing court may not modify a sanction that is authorized by statute if the administrative agency’s order is supported by reliable, probative, and substantial evidence.
In this case, the Ohio Department of Education (“ODE”) denied a teacher’s application for licenses because ODE determined that the teacher engaged in conduct unbecoming of a teacher. ODE specifically found that the teacher modified grades in a way that constituted academic fraud to make ODE’s determination. The teacher appealed ODE’s determination to a trial court, and the trial court affirmed ODE’s determination.
The Ohio appellate court concluded that sufficient reliable, probative, and substantial evidence was provided by ODE to support the finding of conduct unbecoming of a teacher and the sanction of denying the teacher licenses. Thus, the Ohio appellate could not modify the sanction ordered by ODE.
To read this case, click here.
Authors: Matthew John Markling and the McGown & Markling Team.
Note: This blog entry does not constitute – nor does it contain – legal advice. Legal jurisprudence is always changing like the Midwestern weather. As a result, this single blog entry cannot substitute for consultation with a McGown & Markling attorney. If legal advice is needed with respect to a specific factual situation, please feel free to contact a McGown & Markling attorney.