Long
Run Timber Co. v. DCNR – Cmwlth. Court – August 30, 2016
Credibility
determinations may properly be made by the administrative adjudicators from
reading a transcript. Administrative
agencies frequently use a system where a hearing examiner takes the evidence,
but the ultimate fact-finder is the board or commission. Cavanaugh v. Fayette
Cnty. Zoning Hearing Bd., 700 A.2d 1353, 1355-56 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1997); Kramer v.
Dep’t of Ins., 654 A.2d 203, 206 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1995).
Thus,
a board or commission has the power to make findings of fact solely on its
review of the record. Kramer, 654 A.2d at 206. Such a process does not deny a
litigant any due process rights. R. v. Dep’t of Pub. Welfare, 636 A.2d 142, 145
(Pa. 1994). Here, all of the Board members reviewed the full record from the
two-day hearing before making the decision to dismiss the Complaint. They were
acting within their authority when they made their credibility determinations,
and such determinations 21 are not reviewable by this Court. Moreover, the
bases on which the Board rejected appellant’s proferred evidence are supported
by substantial evidence.
As
with other administrative agencies, all determinations of witness credibility
and evidentiary weight are solely within the province of the Board. Pa. Game
Comm’n v. K.D. Miller Lumber Co., Inc., 654 A.2d 6, 9-10 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1994).
“[I]t is not the function of this court to judge the weight and credibility of
the evidence given before an administrative agency.” Id. at 10. Administrative agencies frequently make
credibility determinations on records made before a hearing officer or
administrative law judge. Cavanaugh, 700 A.2d at 1355-56; Kramer, 654 A.2d at
206.
