Vacated on Appeal: Ruling Clarifies Standard of Review
Atlanta, United States: The Supreme Court of Georgia has explicated the standard of review that the commissioner of the Georgia Department of Community Health must utilize when inspecting a judgement of a hearing officer concerning an application for a certificate of need, or CON, to introduce a new health service at a hospital.
A Turnaround in the Court Procedure
Former Commissioner Frank Berry had overturned a hearing officer’s denial of a CON for a hospital project expansion. However, rather than deciding if Berry’s reversal contained “competent substantial evidence,” as was the issue at hand, the Justices clarified that the meaning of the phrase in OCGA § 31-6-44(k)(1) is actually understood to denote substantial evidence that was admissible. This implies that the phrase is suggestive of a standard that does not allow the commissioner to reassess the evidence, scrutinize the credibility of witnesses, or displace his judgment on factual issues for that of the hearing officer based upon the commissioner’s proficiency.
Previous Cases and Further Investigation
This decision follows a series of courtroom debates over the authority of the commissioner, with the hospital’s initial certificate of need being vacated previously. Various litigations have been focusing on whether an intermediate appellate court erred in determining the expression ‘competent substantial
