Cervantes v. Department of Human Services

“In the absence of such an agreement or concession [by the parties] summary judgment is not permissible if the party opposing summary judgment demonstrates that there are factual disputes going to the merits of the challenged agency decision.” Bridgeview Vineyards, Inc. v. State Land Board, 258 Or App 351 (2013).

Petitioner seeks a judicial review of a final order finding that there was reasonable cause to believe that petitioner was reasonable for neglect and lack of supervision and protection of two minors in the Department of Human Services (DHS) Stabilization and Crisis Unit (SACU). Petitioner assigned error to the circuit court’s grant of summary judgment, which he contends was based on a misunderstanding of the summary judgment procedures in judicial review proceedings.  On appeal, Petitioner argued the summary judgment was based on a misunderstanding of the summary judgment procedures in judicial review proceedings, and under a correct understanding of the process, summary judgment was in error. In response, DHS conceded to the error. “In the absence of such an agreement or concession [by the parties] summary judgment is not permissible if the party opposing summary judgment demonstrates that there are factual disputes going to the merits of the challenged agency decision.” Bridgeview Vineyards, Inc. v. State Land Board, 258 Or App 351 (2013).  The Court held that the circuit court was in error, as the petitioner opposed summary judgment and did not concede that the record was adequately developed for the Court to conduct substantial evidence review, as required. Reversed and remanded.