Effie Collins & Collins Chapel Mortuary, Inc. v. Ark. Bd. of Embalmers & Funeral Dirs.
| Decision Date | 13 November 2013 |
| Docket Number | No. CV–13–230.,CV–13–230. |
| Citation | 2013 Ark. App. 678,430 S.W.3d 213 |
| Parties | Effie COLLINS and Collins Chapel Mortuary, Inc., Appellants v. ARKANSAS BOARD OF EMBALMERS AND FUNERAL DIRECTORS, Appellee. |
| Court | Arkansas Court of Appeals |
OPINION TEXT STARTS HERE
Larry J. Steele PLC, Walnut Ridge, by: Larry J. Steele, for appellant.
Dustin McDaniel, Att'y Gen., by: Mark N. Ohrenberger, Ass't Att'y Gen., for appellee.
The appellants in this case are Effie Collins and Collins Chapel Mortuary, Inc. (Collins Chapel). Ms. Collins was licensed as a funeral director, and she owns Collins Chapel, which held a funeral establishment license. The appellants' licenses were previously revoked, and the appellants applied for reinstatement. After a hearing, the Board of Embalmers and Funeral Directors denied the appellants' license applications. The circuit court affirmed the Board. In this appeal, Ms. Collins and Collins Chapel argue that the Board's decision was not supported by substantial evidence, and that the decision was arbitrary and capricious. We affirm.
Our review of the decisions of administrative agencies is limited in scope. Ark. Bd. of Embalmers & Funeral Dirs. v. Reddick, 366 Ark. 89, 233 S.W.3d 639 (2006). With respect to issues of fact, the decisions on credibility and weight of the evidence is within the administrative agency's discretion. Id. With respect to legal issues, administrative agencies are better equipped by specialization, insight through experience, and more flexible procedures than courts, to determine and analyze legal issues affecting their agencies. Id.
Pursuant to Arkansas Code Annotated section 25–15–212(h) (Repl.2002), the circuit court or appellate court may reverse the agency decision if it concludes that the substantial rights of the petitioner have been prejudiced because the administrative findings, inferences, conclusions, or decisions are:
(1) In violation of constitutional or statutory provisions;
(2) In excess of the agency's statutory authority;
(3) Made upon unlawful procedure;
(4) Affected by other error or law;
(5) Not supported by substantial evidence of record; or
(6) Arbitrary, capricious, or characterized by abuse of discretion.
The standard of review to be used by both the circuit court and the appellate court is whether there is substantial evidence to support the agency's findings. Ark. Dep't of Human Servs. v. Bixler, 364 Ark. 292, 219 S.W.3d 125 (2005). Thus, our appellate review is directed not to the circuit court's decision, but rather to the decision of the administrative agency. Id.
In determining whether a decision is supported by substantial evidence, we review the record to ascertain if the decision is supported by relevant evidence that a reasonable mind might accept as adequate to support a conclusion. Zepecki v. Ark. Veterinary Med. Examining Bd., 2010 Ark. App. 187, 375 S.W.3d 41. The requirement that administrative action not be arbitrary or capricious is less demanding than the requirement that it be supported by substantial evidence. Capitol Zoning Dist. Comm'n v. Cowan, 2012 Ark. App. 619, 429 S.W.3d 267, 2012 WL 5353362. When an agency's decision is supported by substantial evidence, it automatically follows that it cannot be classified as unreasonable or arbitrary. Id.
The lengthy procedural history of this case began in April 2008, when Ms. Collins's funeral-director license was suspended and she was fined $1500. The Board imposed these sanctions after finding that Ms. Collins violated a statute by failing to file the death certificate of Fanny May Jackson after Ms. Collins and Collins Chapel handled her funeral in May 2007. The evidence showed that Ms. Collins ignored repeated contacts from the Division of Vital Records, requiring the Division to take the extraordinary step of issuing the death certificate under its own authority. Ms. Collins appealed the Board's decision, and it was affirmed by the circuit court and then affirmed by the court of appeals. See Collins v. Ark. Bd. of Embalmers & Funeral Dirs., 2009 Ark. App. 498, 324 S.W.3d 716.
A subsequent complaint was made against Ms. Collins and Collins Chapel regarding the funeral services they provided for Jeffrey Hampton in November 2007. After a hearing, the Board entered a decision on July 24, 2008, finding that Ms. Collins committed numerous violations of state and federal law, including that the statement of goods and services selected, the general price list, and the outer-burial-containing price were all in noncompliance. The Board suspended Ms. Collins's license for an additional year, and placed Collins Chapel's establishment license on probation for two years. On appeal of that decision, the circuit court found substantial evidence to support the above violations, but found other findings unsupported and remanded to reconsider sanctions. Our record, however, does not contain any further action on those proceedings.
On June 3, 2009, the Board revoked both Ms. Collins's and Collins Chapel's licenses. Those revocations were based on the Board's findings that, during Ms. Collins's license suspension in August 2008, Ms. Collins acted as the funeral director and Collins Chapel handled the funeral of Charles Jefferson. In addition to finding that Ms. Collins acted as a funeral director without a license, the Board found that she committed other violations while handling the funeral, including misrepresentation and fraud. The revocations were appealed to the circuit court and affirmed on March 16, 2011.
In March 2011, Ms. Collins and Collins Chapel requested reinstatement of their funeral-director and funeral-establishment licenses. A hearing on these applications was scheduled for March 15, 2011, and was continued until May 24, 2011.
At the May 24, 2011 hearing, it was established that the Board had received complaints that Ms. Collins was acting as a funeral director after her license had been revoked. The Board had previously referred these complaints to the prosecutor, and on February 17, 2011, Ms. Collins pleaded nolo contendere to operating a funeral home without a license, for which she received a one-year suspended imposition of sentence. A newspaper dated September 9, 2009, was introduced into evidence, and it included two obituaries listing Collins Chapel as the provider of funeral services. Boyd Heath, an inspector for the State Board of Embalmers and Funeral Directors, and Captain Larry Robinson, a criminal investigator, testified that they observed Ms. Collins providing these funeral services in September 2009. These witnesses observed a casket being loaded from the Collins Chapel mortuary building into a hearse, and both witnesses observed graveside services being conducted by Ms. Collins. Also introduced at the hearing was a letter from embalmer Rodney Williams to the Board, wherein Mr. Williams stated that Ms. Collins had listed him as the embalmer on several death certificates, but that he had never embalmed for Ms. Collins.
On August 15, 2011, the Board entered a decision denying Ms. Collins's and Collins Chapel's requests to have their licenses reinstated, specifically finding that Ms. Collins and Collins Chapel provided funeral services after their licenses were revoked. The appellants filed a petition for judicial review, and the circuit court entered an order affirming the Board's decision on November 7, 2012, concluding that the Board's decision was supported by substantial evidence. Ms. Collins and ...
To continue reading
Request your trial