A three-member panel of the Court of Special Appeals, in a split decision, held that the appointing authority's failure to satisfy the "on the record" requirement is incurable after the thirty-day deadline. Foy v. Baltimore City Det. Ctr. , 235 Md. App. 37, 174 A.3d 916 (2017). We reach a different conclusion and, consequently, reverse the judgment of the Court of Special Appeals.
We will dismiss an appeal if it is not taken from a final judgment entered in a civil case by a circuit court, or if a non-final judgment does not fit within the statutory exceptions or the collateral order doctrine. Foy v. Baltimore City Det. Ctr., 235 Md. App. 37, 47 (2017), cert. granted, 457 Md. 660 (2018). In general, where, as here, a circuit court orders a remand of the proceeding to an administrative agency, that is an appealable final order because when "a court remands a proceeding to an administrative agency, the matter reverts to the processes of the agency, and there is nothing further for the court to do.
Although the IG's approval of the Board's decision is not statutorily required, the department is entitled to establish its own internal procedures in compliance with the LEOBR, and PS ยง 3-108(d)(1) does not require that the Commissioner receive the decision directly from the Board itself. See Balt. City Det. Ctr. v. Foy , 235 Md. App. 37, 60, 174 A.3d 916 (2017) (The statute does not "concern itself with the modality of delivery" from the Board to the Commissioner.), rev'd on other grounds , 461 Md. 627, 197 A.3d 1 (2018). As the Court of Appeals recently made clear in an analogous context, however, in construing a statute with a 30-day deadline for a final decision "after receipt" of a recommendation, the triggering event is the "receipt" of the recommendation, i.e., the date the Commissioner was in actual physical possession of the recommendation, not when it was issued/sent by the Board.