Matash v. State, Dept. of Ins.
| Decision Date | 18 November 1964 |
| Docket Number | No. 38603,38603 |
| Citation | 177 Ohio St. 55,202 N.E.2d 305,29 O.O.2d 153 |
| Parties | , 29 O.O.2d 153 MATASH, Appellee, v. The STATE of Ohio, DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE, Appellant. |
| Court | Ohio Supreme Court |
Syllabus by the Court
Where an appeal from an order of an administrative agency has been duly made to the Common Pleas Court pursuant to Section 119.12, Revised Code, and the agency has not prepared and certified to the court a complete record of the proceedings within twenty days after receipt of the notice of appeal and the court has granted the agency no additional time to do so, the court must, upon motion of the appellant, enter a finding in favor of the appellant and render a judgment for the appellant.
On January 11, 1963, the Department of Insurance, herein referred to as the agency, issued an order pursuant to an adjudication revoking the license of Matash to engage in the insurance business. This order was based upon the conviction of Matash, who had been engaged in the bail bond branch of the insurance business, of the crime specified in Section 2917.07, Revised Code, of corruptly attempting to influence a witness before the grand jury.
Matash duly filed a notice of appeal to the Common Pleas Court of Trumbull County on January 25, 1963.
So far as pertinent, Section 119.12, Revised Code, provides:
'Any party adversely affected by any order of an agency issued pursuant to an adjudication * * * revoking * * * a license, may appeal from the order of the agency to the court of common pleas * * *.
'* * *
'Any party desiring to appeal shall file a notice of appeal * * *.
'* * *
On February 28, 1963 (34 days after the filing of the notice of appeal), Matash filed a motion for judgment in his favor, on the ground that the agency had not prepared and certified to the court a complete record of the proceedings as required by the foregoing-quoted statutory provisions.
This motion was heard on March 8, 1963, at which time the agency moved for leave to file such a record instanter.
On June 6, 1963, the Common Pleas Court in its judgment found that the agency had failed 'to comply with the mandatory requirements of Section 119.12,' entered a finding in favor of Matash and ordered that he 'be restored his license to do insurance business.'
The cause is now before this court, pursuant to allowance of a motion to certify the record, on appeal from the judgment of the Court of Appeals which affirmed the judgment of the Common Pleas Court.
Wm. P. McLain, Warren, for appellee.
William B. Saxbe, Atty. Gen., and ...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Kramp v. Ohio State Racing Comm.
...record of the proceedings" with the court. In such a situation, a ruling against the agency is required. Matash v. State (1964), 177 Ohio St. 55, 29 O.O.2d 153, 202 N.E.2d 305, syllabus; Luther v. Bur. of Emp. Serv. (1984), 14 Ohio App.3d 267, 268, 14 OBR 296, 297, 470 N.E.2d 919, 921. Howe......
-
Plumbers & Steamfitters Joint Apprenticeship Committee v. Ohio Civil Rights Commission
...and imposed the 20-day record certification requirement. The Court of Appeals' reliance on R.C. 119.12 and Matash v. Dept. of Insurance (1964), 177 Ohio St. 55, 202 N.E.2d 305, was misplaced because it is R.C. 4112.06(B) which governs certification of the record for judicial review of commi......
-
GWINN v. Ohio ELECTIONS Comm'n
...motion of the appellant, enter a finding in favor of the appellant and render a judgment for the appellant.’ Matash v. State (1964), 177 Ohio St. 55, 29 O.O.2d 153, 202 N.E.2d 305, syllabus. See also State ex rel. Crockett v. Robinson (1981), 67 Ohio St.2d 363, 21 O.O.3d 228, 423 N.E.2d 109......
-
Richard L. Hunter v. City of Cincinnati Civil Service Commission, 81-LW-3224
... ... prejudicial, e.g., Lorms v. State (1976), 48 Ohio ... St. 2d 153, 357 N.E.2d 1067; McKenzie v. Ohio ... 2d 229, 215 N.E.2d ... 397; Matash v. State (1964), 177 Ohio St. 55, 202 ... N.E.2d 305; Brockmeyer v ... ...