HIS WAY HOMES v. Miss. Gaming Com'n
| Decision Date | 18 February 1999 |
| Docket Number | No. 98-CC-00690-SCT.,98-CC-00690-SCT. |
| Citation | 733 So.2d 764 |
| Parties | HIS WAY HOMES, INC. v. MISSISSIPPI GAMING COMMISSION. |
| Court | Mississippi Supreme Court |
Tommy Eugene Furby, Jackson, Attorney for Appellant.
Office of the Attorney General by Joan Myers, Attorney for Appellee.
EN BANC.
SMITH, Justice, for the Court:
STATEMENT OF THE CASE
Statement of the Facts
¶ 1. Appellant His Way Homes, Inc. ("HWH") is a charitable organization licensed by the Mississippi Gaming Commission ("MGC") to conduct bingo games under Mississippi's Charitable Bingo Law, Miss.Code Ann. §§ 97-33-50 et seq. (Rev. 1994 & Supp.1998). Under the statute, "bingo" is not limited to the traditional oral bingo games, but also includes video bingo as well as "pull-tabs," when they are made available as a companion game to bingo and played on the premises of a licensed charitable bingo organization. Miss.Code Ann § 97-33-53(a) (1994). In addition to conducting traditional bingo, HWH maintains ten video pull-tab and bingo machines which are offered for play.
¶ 2. HWH offers video pull-tab and bingo machines for play as many as 35 to 40 hours per week beyond their regular session hours of play. On September 10, 1996, an enforcement agent of MGC found that HWH was paying additional compensation to workers involved in the extended hours operation of these video machines. MGC had previously discovered HWH's practice in 1995, and warned the Executive Director of HWH that such additional compensation violated the statute in MGC's opinion. Nevertheless, HWH continued paying the additional compensation.
¶ 3. MGC then filed a Disciplinary Complaint against HWH charging a violation the statute. The Complaint alleged that HWH paid compensation for the previous two-week period for persons involved in the holding, operating or conducting of licensed games of chance, as follows:
Date Compensation June 4, 1996 $7,437.50 June 18, 1996 $7,731.00 July 2, 1996 $7,738.75 July 16, 1996 $7,721.00 July 31, 1996 $7,752.75 Aug. 12, 1996 $7,708.15 Aug. 27, 1996 $7,833.50 Sept. 10, 1996 $7,676.25 Sept. 26, 1996 $7,468.50
By paying these amounts, the Complaint alleged that HWH had exceeded the maximum compensation allowed under Miss. Code Ann. § 97-33-69(3).
¶ 4. The Complaint alleged that since Section 97-33-69(3) provides that a charitable bingo licensee "may pay as compensation for all persons involved in the holding, operating or conducting of any licensed game or games of chance, an amount not to exceed Four Hundred Dollars ($400.00) per session," and since Section 97-33-67(1)(a) provides that "[n]o licensee shall hold, operate or conduct any bingo game ... more often that eight (8) sessions in any one (1) week," then it followed by simple multiplication ($400 × 16) that the maximum allowable compensation for any two-week period would be $6,400.00. For each two week pay period listed, HWH had exceeded the maximum amount.
¶ 5. HWH did not dispute that it paid the amounts alleged in MGC's Disciplinary Complaint. However, HWH did deny that it violated the statute, because it interprets the statute as not prohibiting such compensation.
Procedural History
¶ 6. On October 25, 1996, MGC filed its Disciplinary Complaint against HWH alleging, among other things, that HWH had violated the $400.00 per session compensation limitation of Miss.Code Ann. § 97-33-69(3) (Supp.1998). A hearing was held on the Disciplinary Complaint on February 3, 1997, and the Hearing Examiner rendered his decision on April 30, 1997, finding that HWH had violated Miss.Code Ann. § 97-33-69(3) and levied a fine of $1,000 against HWH for that violation.
¶ 7. HWH appealed the decision of the Hearing Examiner to MGC on May 19, 1997. MGC sustained the ruling of the Hearing Examiner at its June 26, 1997 regular monthly meeting. Having exhausted its administrative remedies, on July 25, 1997, HWH then filed a Petition for Writ of Certiorari in the Circuit Court of Hinds County, Mississippi, First Judicial District, seeking judicial review of the adverse decision. The Writ of Certiorari was issued over MGC's Motion to Dismiss the Petition on January 27, 1998. The Circuit Court rendered its Opinion and Order on March 6, 1998 affirming the decision of the MGC.
¶ 8. Aggrieved, HWH now appeals the decision of the Circuit Court to this Court and raises the following contentions on appeal:
STANDARD OF REVIEW
¶ 9. The decision of an administrative agency is not to be disturbed unless the agency order was unsupported by substantial evidence; was arbitrary or capricious; was beyond the agency's scope or powers; or violated the constitutional or statutory rights of the aggrieved party. Sprouse v. Mississippi Employment Security Comm., 639 So.2d 901, 902 (Miss. 1994); Mississippi Comm. on Environmental Quality v. Chickasaw County Board of Supervisors, 621 So.2d 1211, 1215 (Miss.1993); Melody Manor Convalescent Center v. Mississippi State Department of Health, 546 So.2d 972, 974 (Miss.1989). There is a rebuttable presumption in favor of the agency's decisions; the burden of proving to the contrary is on the challenging party. Sprouse, 639 So.2d at 902; Chickasaw County, 621 So.2d at 1216.
¶ 10. Appellate review of an agency decision is limited to the record and the agency's findings. Chickasaw County, 621 So.2d at 1216; Mississippi Employment Security Commission v. PDN, Inc., 586 So.2d 838, 840 (Miss.1991). The reviewing court cannot substitute its judgment for that of the agency or reweigh the facts of the case. Sprouse, 639 So.2d at 902; Chickasaw County, 621 So.2d at 1216; Mississippi Public Service Commission v. Merchants Truck Line, Inc., 598 So.2d 778, 782 (Miss.1992). Chancery and circuit courts are held to the same standard as this Court when reviewing agency decisions. Chickasaw County, 621 So.2d at 1215. When this Court finds that the lower court has exceeded its authority in overturning an agency decision, we will reverse and reinstate the agency's decision. Chickasaw County, 621 So.2d at 1215; Merchants Truck Line, 598 So.2d at 782.
¶ 11. Unless the agency's interpretation is repugnant to the plain meaning of the statute thereof, the court is to defer to the agency's interpretation. Mississippi State Tax Comm'n v. Lady Forest Farms, Inc., 701 So.2d 294, 296 (Miss. 1997). See also Kerr-McGee Chem. Corp. v. Buelow, 670 So.2d 12, 16 (Miss.1995)
; Tower Loan of Mississippi v. Mississippi State Tax Comm'n, 662 So.2d 1077 (Miss. 1995); Mississippi State Tax Comm'n v. Dyer Inv. Co., 507 So.2d 1287, 1289 (Miss. 1987). Further, the interpretation given the statute by the agency chosen to administer it should be accorded deference. Williams v. Puckett, 624 So.2d 496, 499 (Miss.1993); Gill v. Mississippi Dep't of Wildlife Conservation, 574 So.2d 586, 593 (Miss.1990).
¶ 12. The facts are not in dispute. Before this Court is a rather straightforward question of statutory interpretation. However, this is an issue of first impression as these specific code sections have not been addressed previously by this Court. At issue are specific provisions of the Charitable Bingo Law, as amended, found at Miss.Code Ann. § 97-33-50 et seq. (1992). Appellant HWH contends that MGC's interpretation of these code sections is unreasonable and burdensome to the point of being arbitrary and capricious. Furthermore, the Circuit Court as well as the Hearing Examiner previously ruled that MGC acted within its authority.
¶ 13. Specifically, HWH contends that the circuit court erroneously interpreted Section 97-33-67(1)(a), which reads as follows:
¶ 14. The circuit court said that "[t]he statutory language of Miss.Code Ann. 97-33-67(1)(a) (Supp.1996) is clear and unambiguous that no additional compensation can be paid beyond the amount of $400.00 per session." HWH argues that this ruling is erroneous, because Section 97-33-67(1)(a) says nothing about "the amount of $400.00 per session." Clearly, the circuit court was discussing Section 97-33-67(1)(a) as it relates to Section 97-33-69(3), which reads, in pertinent part:
... [A]ny licensee may pay as compensation for all persons involved in the holding, operating or conducting of any licensed game or games of chance, an amount not to exceed Four Hundred Dollars ($400.00) per session. Persons who may be compensated from the Four Hundred Dollars ($400.00) per session amount may include the bingo supervisor or alternate supervisor, callers, runners and cashiers....
Miss.Code Ann. § 97-33-69(3) (Supp.1998) (emphasis added).
¶ 15. HWH next contends that the circuit court failed to address the payment of workers "out-of-sess...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Drummer v. State
... ... State, 167 So.3d 1222, 122526 ( 24), 2014 WL 3409099, *1 ( 24) (Miss.Ct.App. July 15, 2014). 3. In 2009, Drummer pled guilty to felony fleeing ... He claimed his two prior burglarieswhere he burgled two homes on the same day on the same mailing routewere not separate incidents. Id ... v. Miss. Gaming Comm'n, 733 So.2d 764, 769 ( 20) (Miss.1999) (holding that the Court will ... ...
-
Hamilton v. Safeway Ins. Co.
...interpretation." Miss. Dep't of Corr. v. Harris, 831 So. 2d 1190, 1192 (Miss. Ct. App. 2002) (citing His Way Homes, Inc. v. Mississippi Gaming Comm'n, 733 So. 2d 764, 767 (Miss. 1999)); see also Gill v. Miss. Dep't of Wildlife Conservation, 574 So. 2d 586, 593 (Miss. 1990) ("[W]e have accep......
-
Lawson v. Honeywell Int'l, Inc.
...statute or presume that the legislature failed to state something other than what was plainly stated.” His Way Homes, Inc. v. Miss. Gaming Comm'n, 733 So.2d 764, 769 (Miss.1999). The Legislature did not state that the MPLA applies to, or precludes, claims against designers of a product. Hol......
-
Keys v. Safeway Ins. Co.
...interpretation." Miss. Dep't of Corr. v. Harris, 831 So. 2d 1190, 1192 (Miss. Ct. App. 2002) (citing His Way Homes, Inc. v. Mississippi Gaming Comm'n, 733 So. 2d 764, 767 (Miss. 1999)); see also Gill v. Miss. Dep't of Wildlife Conservation, 574 So. 2d 586, 593 (Miss. 1990) ("[W]e have accep......