| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
knowingly |
|
|
Summary:
Whether or not a person has knowingly made one or more false or misleading statements does not require any special expertise on the part of the decision-maker. In this regard, the BOR is equally qualified to render such factual determinations.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
jurisdiction |
independent decision-making |
|
Summary:
Whether the phrase "in its opinion" has the effect of insulating the Commission's decision to impose a penalty from review by the BOR. Held that BOR possesses the requisite jurisdiction to formulate its own opinion with respect to a false or misleading statement.
The BOR is empowered to engage in a de novo review with respect to factual matters and is in a better position to make objective findings of fact. It is the BOR which functions as a quasi-judicial body not the Commission.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| penalties |
reconsideration of penalty |
remove |
|
Summary:
Whether the phrase "in its opinion" has the effect of insulating the Commission's decision to impose a penalty from review by the BOR. Held that BOR possesses the requisite jurisdiction to formulate its own opinion with respect to a false or misleading statement.
| Issue: |
Sub-Issue 1: |
Sub-Issue 2: |
Sub-Issue 3: |
| board of referees |
legislative authority |
discretionary powers |
|
Summary:
Whether the phrase "in its opinion" has the effect of insulating the Commission's decision to impose a penalty from the review by the BOR. Held that BOR possesses the requisite jurisdiction to formulate its own opinion with respect to a false or misleading statement.
The BOR is empowered to engage in a de novo review with respect to factual matters and is in a better position to make objective findings of fact. It is the BOR which functions as a quasi-judicial body not the Commission.
