Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

Federico v. Brannan Sand & Gravel Co.

Supreme Court of Colorado

Decided March 19, 1990No. 88SC587Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partJustice Mullarkey

I agree with the majority that the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) standard of review applies to the Industrial Claim Appeals Panel (panel) when it reviews a hearing officer’s decision in an unemployment compensation matter. I respectfully dissent, however, from the majority’s application of that standard in this case.

Section 24-4-105(15)(b), 10A C.R.S. (1988), provides in relevant part:

The findings of evidentiary fact, as distinguished from ultimate conclusions of fact, made by the administrative law judge or the hearing officer shall not be set aside by the agency on review of the…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Lee v. State Board of Dental ExaminersSupreme Court of Colorado · 1982
  2. Baca v. HelmSupreme Court of Colorado · 1984
  3. Pierce v. Industrial CommissionColorado Court of Appeals · 1976
  4. Raisch v. Industrial Com'n of State of Colo.Colorado Court of Appeals · 1986
  5. Woodbury Daily Times Co. v. Los Angeles Times-Washington Post News ServiceDistrict Court, D. New Jersey · 1985

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API