Opinion ID: 861078
Heading Depth: 1
Heading Rank: 3

Heading: conclusion

Text: This appeal from a circuit court's reversal of an administrative agency is somewhat unusual. Unlike the normal case, the appellant is not so much in need of demonstrating where the lower court was wrong; the appellant must prove that the administrative agency was right. In this case, the Tax Commission quite properly raised issues regarding the circuit court's incorrect analysis of the EAB's decision. However, even if we agree with all the reasons raised by the Tax Commission, we still need to satisfy ourselves that the circuit court was not correct in reversing the EAB for some other reason. In other words, if the circuit court had some unassailable reason for reversing the EAB, an appellant might decide just to ignore that reason on appeal. We would err in reversing merely because we agreed with an appellant on all the errors that it discussed. We have examined the circuit court's two opinions, and find no separate justification for the reversal of the EAB. Instead, we conclude that the EAB's decision was supported by substantial evidence, was not arbitrary nor capricious, and did not violate a statutory or constitutional right of the employee. THE JUDGMENTS OF THE CIRCUIT COURT OF TISHOMINGO COUNTY OF MAY 10, 1995 AND OF OCTOBER 21, 1993 ARE REVERSED, AND THE ORDER AND JUDGMENT OF THE MISSISSIPPI EMPLOYEE APPEALS BOARD OF OCTOBER 21, 1992, IS REINSTATED IN ITS ENTIRETY. ALL COSTS ARE TAXED TO THE APPELLEE. BRIDGES, C.J., McMILLIN AND THOMAS, P.JJ., COLEMAN, DIAZ, HERRING, HINKEBEIN, KING, AND PAYNE, JJ., CONCUR.