Aviation Administration v. Noland
Citation | 386 Md. 556,873 A.2d 1145 |
Decision Date | 10 May 2005 |
Docket Number | No. 15,15 |
Parties | MARYLAND AVIATION ADMINISTRATION v. Clifton F. NOLAND. |
Court | Maryland Court of Appeals |
Maureen M. Dove, Asst. Atty. Gen. (J. Joseph Curran, Jr., Atty. Gen., Andrew H. Baida, Asst. Atty. Gen., Louisa H. Goldstein, John C. Bell, Asst. Atty's Gen., on brief), for petitioner.
Dennis Gottesmann (Law Offices of Dennis M. Gottesmann, P.A., Greenbelt, on brief), for respondent.
Argued before BELL, C.J., ELDRIDGE1, RAKER, WILNER, CATHELL, HARRELL and BATTAGLIA, JJ.
Opinion by ELDRIDGE, J.
This is an action for judicial review of an adjudicatory administrative decision terminating the employment of a state governmental employee. The Circuit Court for Anne Arundel County, while accepting the administrative findings of fact as being supported by substantial evidence, reversed the administrative decision on the ground that the termination sanction for the employee's misconduct was "arbitrary." The Court of Special Appeals, in an unreported opinion, affirmed. Both courts relied upon an earlier Court of Special Appeals' case, Maryland State Retirement Agency v. Delambo, 109 Md.App. 683, 675 A.2d 1018 (1996). We shall reverse, shall direct that the administrative decision be affirmed, and shall overrule Maryland State Retirement Agency v. Delambo, supra.
The respondent Clifton F. Noland was a paramedic employed by the Maryland Aviation Administration, which is a unit of the Maryland Department of Transportation. The basic facts concerning Noland's employment history and the incident leading to his termination were undisputed. They are set forth in the opinion of Administrative Law Judge (ALJ) Sharonne R. Bonardi as follows:
When Noland and Clopein returned to BWI, Clopein, as the non-driving paramedic and pursuant to established internal agency practice, completed and filed a Maryland Ambulance Information System Report and a BWI Fire and Rescue Service Report, but, as found by the ALJ, he "did not include any statements regarding the Employee's act of twice striking the Patient." In addition, upon returning from the Hospital to BWI, Noland and Clopein failed to report Noland's act of twice striking the patient either to the Emergency Medical Services (EMS) Coordinator, or to the Shift Supervisor, or to the Shift Commander.
The ALJ further found that, later in the day of March 30, 1999, Noland completed his report on April 3, 1999, and submitted it to Paramedic Fayer and the Division Fire Chief on the same day. Clopein completed and submitted his report on April 15, 1999.
According to the ALJ's findings, "[a]ll BWI paramedics and emergency medical personnel operate under the medical license of Dr. Phillip Phillips, BWI, FRS Medical Director." Dr. Phillips was informed of the striking incident on April 15, 1999, and, that same day, suspended Noland from operating under Dr. Phillips's medical license. On the next day, the Maryland Institute of Emergency Medical Services System suspended for one year Noland's paramedic license for twice striking the patient. Also on April 16, 1999, the BWI Airport Fire Department began an investigation of the incident. The investigation was competed on April 20, 1999, and Clopein was suspended without pay for five days for failing to report the incident. Noland, on April 22, 1999, was suspended without pay pending the disposition of charges for his termination as an employee with the Maryland Aviation Administration. Following the completion of the investigation, Noland was informed on July 2, 1999, that charges for termination of his employment and disqualification for future employment with the Maryland Aviation Administration, based upon his striking a patient twice and failing to report the incident, had been filed against him.
Noland filed a timely appeal to the Maryland Office of Administrative Hearings, and a hearing was held before ALJ Bonardi on January 27, 2000, and continued on March 6, 2000. The ALJ on April 20, 2000, filed an extensive opinion containing findings of fact as summarized above, conclusions of law, and a proposed decision. The ALJ concluded that Noland did not violate "Management's Workplace Violence Policy" because "he did not strike the Patient out of anger, but rather to prevent or reduce possible exposure to an infectious disease," and that his "actions were not done for the purpose of intimidation, or for the purpose of harming, damaging, or causing injury to persons or property."2 ALJ Bonardi, after a detailed review of COMAR regulations, the "Manual of Maryland Medical Protocols for Cardiac Rescue Technicians and Emergency Medical Technicians-Paramedic," and the expert testimony at the hearing, further concluded as follows:
...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
Belfiore v. Merch. Link, LLC
...is for the agency to draw the inferences.") (citing Bulluck , 283 Md. at 512–13, 390 A.2d 1119 ); accord Maryland Aviation Admin. v. Noland , 386 Md. 556, 572–73, 873 A.2d 1145 (2005). When deciding issues of law, our review is more expansive, although the agency's interpretation of a statu......
-
Montgomery Cnty. Pub. Sch. v. Donlon, 571, Sept. Term, 2016.
...agency's interpretation and application of the statute which the agency administers.' " (quoting Maryland Aviation Admin. v. Noland , 386 Md. 556, 572, 873 A.2d 1145 (2005) )). In the case before us, DBM also made a determination that Donlon was not subject to the WBL. The letter by the OSE......
-
Madison Park N. Apartments, L.P. v. Comm'r Housing
...from that evidence.”Emps.' Ret. Sys. of Balt. v. Dorsey, 430 Md. 100, 110, 59 A.3d 990 (2013) (quoting Md. Aviation Admin. v. Noland, 386 Md. 556, 571, 873 A.2d 1145 (2005)). Madison Park argues that the evidence referred to crime in the general neighborhood, not specifically in the propert......
-
Halici v. Gaithersburg
...should defer to the agency's fact-finding and drawing of inferences if they are supported by the record." Maryland Aviation Admin. v. Noland, 386 Md. 556, 571, 873 A.2d 1145 (2005) (quoting Banks, supra, 354 Md. at 67-69, 729 A.2d 376 (further citation omitted)). "`Even with regard to some ......