Although this court has not addressed whether the lifting of a stop work order is appealable, our neighboring state of Maryland has considered this exact question. SeeMontgomery County v. Longo , 187 Md.App. 25, 975 A.2d 312, 330 (2009). There, a neighbor did not timely challenge the issuance of a building permit, but, after construction began, complained of permit violations, and a stop work order was issued.
Denied November 13, 2009. Reported below: 187 Md.App. 25, 975 A.2d 312. Petitions for Writ of Certiorari denied.
What a reviewing court must not do is to substitute its judgment for that of the administrative body on matters that are within the realm of the administrative body's expertise. See Montgomery County v. Longo, 187 Md.App. 25, 49 (2009).
Montgomery Cty. v. Longo, 187 Md.App. 25, 49-50 (2009) (citations omitted).
With respect to the Board's factual findings, we apply the substantial evidence test, which "'requires us to affirm an agency decision, if, after reviewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the agency, we find a reasoning mind reasonably could have reached the factual conclusion the agency reached.'" Miller v. City of Annapolis Historic Pres. Comm'n, 200 Md.App. 612, 632 (2011) (quoting Montgomery [County] v. Longo, 187 Md.App. 25, 49 (2009)). Administrative credibility findings likewise are entitled to great deference on judicial review.
Miller v. City of Annapolis Historic Pres. Comm'n, 200 Md. App. 612, 632, 28 A.3d 147 (2011) (quoting Montgomery [Cty] v.Longo, 187 Md. App. 25, 49, 975 A.2d 312 (2009)). Administrative credibility findings likewise are entitled to great deference on judicial review.
With respect to the agency's factual findings, we apply the substantial evidence test, which "requires us to affirm an agency decision, if, after reviewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the agency, we find a reasoning mind reasonably could have reached the factual conclusion the agency reached." Miller v. City of Annapolis Historic Pres. Comm'n, 200 Md. App. 612, 632 (2011) (quoting Montgomery County v. Longo, 187 Md. App. 25, 49, cert. denied, 411 Md. 357 (2009)). Accord Comm'r of Labor and Indus. v. Bethlehem Steel Corp., 344 Md. 17, 24 (1996).
With respect to the Board's factual findings, we apply the substantial evidence test, which "'requires us to affirm an agency decision, if, after reviewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the agency, we find a reasoning mind reasonably could have reached the factual conclusion the agency reached.'" Miller v. City of Annapolis Historic Pres. Comm'n, 200 Md. App. 612, 632 (2011) (quoting Montgomery Cnty v. Longo, 187 Md. App. 25, 49 (2009)). Administrative credibility findings likewise are entitled to great deference on judicial review.
In Montgomery County v. Longo , in which a decision "based on new factual information presented and submission of a revised building permit application" was "not merely a reaffirmation of the prior issuance of a building permit," and thus was appealable. 187 Md.App. 25, 54–55, 975 A.2d 312 (2009). But again, there's a step missing here: the actual decision by OPZ to modify Laurel Racing's sketch plan with a new EDU allocation.
We must affirm the agency's decision "'if, after reviewing the evidence in a light most favorable to the agency, we find a reasoning mind reasonably could have reached the factual conclusion the agency reached.'" Miller v. City of Annapolis Historic Preservation Comm'n, 200 Md. App. 612, 632 (2011)(quoting Montgomery County v. Longo, 187 Md. App. 25, 49 (2009)). As for the agency's conclusions of law, a certain amount of deference may be afforded when the agency is interpreting or applying the statute the agency itself administers.