Alabama Medicaid Agency v. Peoples

Citation549 So.2d 504
PartiesMedicare & Medicaid Guide P 38,015 ALABAMA MEDICAID AGENCY v. Arnie A. PEOPLES. Civ. 6842.
Decision Date17 May 1989
CourtAlabama Court of Civil Appeals

Don Siegelman, Atty. Gen., and Charles H. Durhan III, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellant.

R. Wyatt Howell of Potts & Young, Florence, for appellee.

INGRAM, Presiding Judge.

This case arose after the commissioner of the Alabama Medicaid Agency concurred with the hearing officer's recommendation to declare Arnie A. Peoples ineligible for Medicaid benefits for the month of July 1987. Peoples sought judicial review of this decision in the Circuit Court of Marion County pursuant to the administrative procedure act. The circuit court, after an ore tenus proceeding, set aside the commissioner's determination and declared that the applicant was eligible for Medicaid benefits. The court's order reads, in pertinent part, as follows:

"[U]pon consideration of the [pleadings and stipulations of the parties], it is ordered, adjudged and decreed that the defendant Alabama Medicaid Agency has not acted in accordance with pertinent agency rules, or alternatively has committed errors of law, or alternatively reached a clearly erroneous decision in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record, or alternatively reached an unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious decision, and it is further ordered, adjudged and decreed that plaintiff Arnie A. Peoples was eligible for benefits for the month of July 1988."

The agency appeals, contending, in part, that the trial court's order should be reversed and remanded for its failure to list in writing its reasons for reversing the agency's final decision as required by the Alabama Administrative Procedure Act, § 41-22-20(l ), Ala.Code 1975 (1982 Repl.Vol.). This section requires the court to set out in writing the reasons for its findings when it reverses a decision of the agency.

Peoples submits that the trial court's order clearly parallels the language of § 41-22-20(k) and thus satisfies the spirit of § 41-22-20(l ). The language in § 41-22-20(k) is set forth as follows:

"The court may reverse or modify the decision or grant other appropriate relief from the agency action, equitable or legal, including declaratory relief, if the court finds that the agency action is due to be set aside or modified under standards set forth in appeal or review statutes applicable to that agency, or where no such statutory standards for judicial review are applicable to the agency, if substantial rights of the petitioner have been prejudiced because the agency action is:

"(1) In violation of constitutional or statutory provisions;

"(2) In excess of the statutory authority of the agency;

"(3) In violation of any pertinent agency rule;

"(4) Made upon unlawful procedure;

"(5) Affected by other error of law;

"(6) Clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence on the whole record; or

"(7) Unreasonable, arbitrary or capricious or characterized by an abuse of discretion or a clearly unwarranted exercise of discretion."

We are satisfied that the circuit court's failure to state reasons for its reversal of the commissioner's determination of ineligibility requires reversal here and that the case be remanded to the circuit court.

Judicial review of an agency's administrative decision is limited to determining...

To continue reading

Request your trial
42 cases
  • Ala. Dep't of Revenue v. U.S. Xpress Leasing, Inc.
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Civil Appeals
    • December 2, 2016
    ...also limited by the presumption of correctness which attaches to a decision by an administrative agency.’" Alabama Medicaid Agency v. Peoples, 549 So.2d 504, 506 (Ala. Civ. App. 1989). Also, the Alabama Administrative Procedure Act provides that," ‘[e]xcept where judicial review is by trial......
  • Ala. Bd. of Examiners in Psychology v. Hamilton
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Civil Appeals
    • September 27, 2013
    ...by an administrative agency.” ’“Ex parte Alabama Bd. of Nursing, 835 So.2d 1010, 1012 (Ala.2001) (quoting Alabama Medicaid Agency v. Peoples, 549 So.2d 504, 506 (Ala.Civ.App.1989) ).”Alabama Bd. of Nursing v. Williams, 941 So.2d 990, 995 (Ala.Civ.App.2005). Section 34–26–48, Ala.Code 1975, ......
  • Knoblett v. Alabama Bd. of Massage Therapy
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Civil Appeals
    • March 9, 2007
    ...(Ala. 2004) (quoting Ex parte Alabama Bd. of Nursing, 835 So.2d 1010, 1012 (Ala.2001), quoting in turn Alabama Medicaid Agency v. Peoples, 549 So.2d 504, 506 (Ala.Civ. App.1989)). "A presumption of correctness attaches to the decision of an administrative agency due to its recognized expert......
  • Ala. Dept. of Youth Serv. V. Personnel Bd.
    • United States
    • Alabama Court of Civil Appeals
    • October 24, 2008
    ...(Ala. 2004) (quoting Ex parte Alabama Bd. of Nursing, 835 So.2d 1010, 1012 (Ala.2001), quoting in turn Alabama Medicaid Agency v. Peoples, 549 So.2d 504, 506 (Ala.Civ. App.1989)). "This court reviews a circuit court's judgment without a presumption of correctness because the circuit court i......
  • Request a trial to view additional results

VLEX uses login cookies to provide you with a better browsing experience. If you click on 'Accept' or continue browsing this site we consider that you accept our cookie policy. ACCEPT