Opinion ID: 2598222
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 4

Heading: Bickford's Appeal to the Superior Court

Text: Bickford appealed the commissioner's decision to the superior court. On appeal, she initially moved for a remand, asserting that the commissioner had improperly issued a decision without affording her a right to a hearing. The superior court granted her motion and remanded the case to the department with directions to receive testimonial and documentary evidence that [Bickford] seeks to include in the record. Although the department conducted a hearing on remand, no new evidence was disclosed with which to supplement the record [and][n]o additional documents were admitted into evidence. Bickford then moved for summary judgment in the superior court. Her motion sought to expand the scope of the appeal to include not just the procedural issues decided in response to her second complaint but also the procedural issues regarding the original complaint. Thus, in addition to challenging the department's refusal to accept her original complaint, Bickford asked the superior court to remand the case to the department and require it to address the merits of the issues raised in the original complaint. In support of her motion for summary judgment, Bickford submitted a Corrected and expanded version of the complaint she originally filed on October 9, 1998. After considering the department's opposition, Superior Court Judge John Suddock affirmed the commissioner's decision to dismiss Bickford's case, determining that investigator Barats's findings and conclusions were supported by substantial evidence and not contrary to law. The court declined to address Bickford's motion to grant summary judgment on new issues not considered and decided by Barats, explaining that summary judgment is not permitted under the Appellate Rules and that the documents offered in support of the new issues were outside the scope of this court's order allowing supplementation of the record and supplemental briefing. After considering a motion by Bickford asking the court to reconsider various aspects of its ruling, the superior court summarily denied the motion, and Bickford filed this appeal.