§ 21.14 Appellate Review of A Lower Court's Decision

• Jurisdiction: Washington

§21.14 APPELLATE REVIEW OF A LOWER COURT'S DECISION

An aggrieved party may seek appellate review of a superior court decision on judicial review of administrative action. Absent a specific statute or court rule to the contrary, the procedures are the same as in civil cases. Such procedures include filing fees, forms of pleadings, and the like. This section explains the special application of appellate procedures to judicial review on the record of an administrative action.

(1) Rules of Appellate Procedure specific to judicial review of administrative action: record on review and assignments of error in briefs

RAP 9.1(a) identifies that the record on review "may" consist of a report of proceedings, clerks' papers, exhibits, and "a certified record of administrative adjudicative proceedings." The appellate court reviews the agency's order on the agency's record; it does not review the superior court's conduct of the prior review. See §21.9.

Therefore, except when the superior court has admitted new evidence or addressed ancillary procedural matters, the record in the appellate court will primarily consist of the administrative record. For a discussion of the administrative record, including supplementation, see §21.9.

RAP 9.7(c) requires the superior court clerk to transmit the certified administrative record to the appellate court.

Practice Tip: Unless the superior court admitted new evidence or addressed ancillary procedural matters, the party seeking review should normally designate just the minimum clerk's papers in RAP 9.6(b)(1) and file a statement in lieu of a statement of arrangements, explaining that a report of proceedings is not necessary because the case on appeal involves judicial review of an administrative record. See RAP 9.2(a).

In most instances, the appellant need not assign error to the superior court's decision. Although RAP 10.3(a) and (g) state a general requirement that appellants assign error to the superior court decision, an "assignment of error to the superior court findings is not necessary" when the appellate court conducts review on the agency record, because the appellate court is not reviewing the superior court's decision. Waste Mgmt. of Seattle, Inc. v. Utils. & Transp. Comm'n,123 Wn.2d 621, 632, 869 P.2d 1034 (1994). Under RAP 10.3(h), an appellant who challenges administrative action under Chapter 34.05 RCW must "set forth a separate concise statement of each error which a party contends was made by the agency issuing the order, together with the issues pertaining to each assignment of error." RAP 10.3(h).

Exceptions arise when the superior court takes new evidence to supplement the agency record or examines an issue not raised before the agency, because in those situations, the appellate court looks to the superior court record on those matters. Waste Mgmt., 123 Wn.2d at 633-34; see also Twin Bridge Marine Park v. Dep't of Ecology,162 Wn.2d 825, 834, 175 P.3d 1050 (2008). An appellant challenging superior court findings on such matters must assign error to the related findings pursuant to RAP 10.3(a) and (g). Whether the superior court properly admitted additional evidence is a question of law reviewed de novo. Herman v. Shorelines Hearings Bd., 149 Wn.App. 444, 454, 204 P.3d 928, review denied,166 Wn.2d 1029 (2009).

Comment:

...