{
  "id": 1744763,
  "name": "DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION, Revenue Division, et al v. ARKANSAS MERIT SYSTEM COUNCIL BOARD et al",
  "name_abbreviation": "Department of Finance & Administration v. Arkansas Merit System Council Board",
  "decision_date": "1983-10-03",
  "docket_number": "83-97",
  "first_page": "325",
  "last_page": "326",
  "citations": [
    {
      "type": "official",
      "cite": "280 Ark. 325"
    },
    {
      "type": "parallel",
      "cite": "658 S.W.2d 369"
    }
  ],
  "court": {
    "name_abbreviation": "Ark.",
    "id": 8808,
    "name": "Arkansas Supreme Court"
  },
  "jurisdiction": {
    "id": 34,
    "name_long": "Arkansas",
    "name": "Ark."
  },
  "cites_to": [
    {
      "cite": "243 Ark. 981",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        8725210
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1968,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/243/0981-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "278 Ark. 23",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1748284
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1982,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/278/0023-01"
      ]
    },
    {
      "cite": "204 Ark. 521",
      "category": "reporters:state",
      "reporter": "Ark.",
      "case_ids": [
        1444237
      ],
      "weight": 2,
      "year": 1942,
      "opinion_index": 0,
      "case_paths": [
        "/ark/204/0521-01"
      ]
    }
  ],
  "analysis": {
    "cardinality": 252,
    "char_count": 2803,
    "ocr_confidence": 0.867,
    "pagerank": {
      "raw": 6.087085966315723e-08,
      "percentile": 0.37713202584397776
    },
    "sha256": "7f36049278ff64dddad090e4bfa44c308b95e1f8dca7d3231915acec49837aa0",
    "simhash": "1:1b474ce063af33b4",
    "word_count": 462
  },
  "last_updated": "2023-07-14T21:12:47.726191+00:00",
  "provenance": {
    "date_added": "2019-08-29",
    "source": "Harvard",
    "batch": "2018"
  },
  "casebody": {
    "judges": [],
    "parties": [
      "DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION, Revenue Division, et al v. ARKANSAS MERIT SYSTEM COUNCIL BOARD et al"
    ],
    "opinions": [
      {
        "text": "Darrell Hickman, Justice.\nThe only question we must answer in this case is whether the Department of Finance and Administration, an agency of the executive branch of government, and the Commissioner of Revenue, have a right of appeal to the circuit court from a decision of the Arkansas Merit Council Board which reinstated two fired employees. There is no such right of appeal for these parties and the circuit court was right in dismissing their petition for review.\nIn 1981, the General Assembly passed Act 693 which established the Merit Council Board essentially to hear appeals of cases concerning disciplined or discharged state employees. The Council has been in existence for years but its jurisdiction and authority was increased by Act 693. See McCain v. Collins, 204 Ark. 521, 164 S.W.2d 448 (1942). Significantly the 1981 law plainly says: \u201cThe decisions by this Board regarding such appeals shall be final and binding on the appointing authority/agency.\u201d That language clearly prevents the appellants from seeking judicial review of the Merit Board\u2019s order to reinstate the two employees.\nSelph v. Quapaw Vocational Technical School, 278 Ark. 23, 643 S.W.2d 534 (1982), is miscited as authority for the appellant\u2019s position. In Selph we only held that the Merit Council could not hear an appeal over which it had no j urisdiction and that certiorari was the proper remedy there. That is undisputedly not the case here.\nThe appellees argue the trial court was right and agree with the trial court\u2019s reasoning that such an appeal would make the state a defendant in its own court in violation of Ark. Const, art. 5, \u00a7 20. It is unnecessary to decide that issue in view of the plain language of the statute and the narrow issue on appeal. Miller v. Dyer, 243 Ark. 981, 423 S.W.2d 275 (1968).\nThe two employees, L. Faye Pierce, an auditor, and E. F. Patton, an audit coordinator, for the Department of Finance and Administration, Revenue Division, urge us to affirm the order of the Merit Council on the basis of substantial evidence and prevent further litigation they anticipate as to the constitutionality of Act 693. Neither party has placed before us issues which might conceivably permit review of this case.\nAffirmed.",
        "type": "majority",
        "author": "Darrell Hickman, Justice."
      }
    ],
    "attorneys": [
      "Timothy J. Leathers, Joseph V. Svoboda, Kelly S. Jennings, Wayne Zakrzewski, Ann Fuchs, Joe Morphew, and Michael D. Munns, by: John H. Theis, for appellants.",
      "Haley ir Young, P.A., by: Gregory M. Hopkins, for appellee Arkansas Merit System Council Board.",
      "Hardin, Grace, Napper, Allen ir East, for appellees L. Faye Pierce and E. F. Patton."
    ],
    "corrections": "",
    "head_matter": "DEPARTMENT OF FINANCE AND ADMINISTRATION, Revenue Division, et al v. ARKANSAS MERIT SYSTEM COUNCIL BOARD et al\n83-97\n658 S.W.2d 369\nSupreme Court of Arkansas\nOpinion delivered October 3, 1983\n[Rehearing denied October 31, 1983.]\nTimothy J. Leathers, Joseph V. Svoboda, Kelly S. Jennings, Wayne Zakrzewski, Ann Fuchs, Joe Morphew, and Michael D. Munns, by: John H. Theis, for appellants.\nHaley ir Young, P.A., by: Gregory M. Hopkins, for appellee Arkansas Merit System Council Board.\nHardin, Grace, Napper, Allen ir East, for appellees L. Faye Pierce and E. F. Patton."
  },
  "file_name": "0325-01",
  "first_page_order": 351,
  "last_page_order": 352
}