Pursuant to Md. Code (1984, 2014 Repl. Vol., 2015 Suppl.), § 10-222(h)(3) of the State Government Article (“SG”), we may only reverse or modify the decision of an administrative agency if that decision is:
(i) unconstitutional;
(ii) exceeds the statutory authority or jurisdiction of the final decision maker;
(iii) results from an unlawful procedure;
(iv) is affected by any other error of law;
(v) is unsupported by competent, material, and substantial evidence in light of the entire record as submitted; or
(vi) is arbitrary or capricious.
SG § 10-222(h)(3). “‘On appellate review of the decision of an administrative agency, this Court reviews the agency’s decision, not the circuit court’s decision.’” Long Green Valley Ass’n v. Prigel Family Creamery, 206 Md. App. 264, 273 (2012) (quoting Halici v. City of Gaithersburg, 180 Md. App. 238, 248 (2008)); Ware v. People’s Counsel for Balt. Cnty., 223 Md. App. 669, 680 (2015) (“In an appeal from a judgment entered on judicial review of a final agency decision, we look ‘through’ the decision of the circuit court to review the agency decision itself.”). Moreover,
“Our review of the agency’s factual findings entails only an appraisal and evaluation of the agency’s fact finding and not an independent decision on the evidence. This
…show more content…
In this case, Brunner failed to persuade the ALJ that her disability was the natural and proximate result of her fall on December 10, 2003. The ALJ was free to find Draper’s opinions more credible than Fanchetti’s “conclusory” assessment. Draper’s testimony that Brunner’s disability was the result of preexisting degenerative disc disease constitutes substantial evidence supporting the ALJ’s finding. Moreover, Draper’s testimony was supported by medical records originating before the alleged fall. Indeed, the RPS’s evidence, if believed, was more than sufficient to refute Brunner’s claim that her disability was the natural and proximate result of her fall on December 10,