Opinion ID: 2640775
Heading Depth: 3
Heading Rank: 6

Heading: Establishment of the Appeals Commission Is Substantive Law.

Text: AKPIRG argues that because chapter 10, FSSLA 2005 failed to amend the appellate rules that provide for appeals in administrative proceedings, the court rules providing for an appeal to the superior court remain in effect. It bases its argument on the constitutional provision that changes to court rules must be enacted by a two-thirds vote of each house of the legislature. [144] It also argues that because article IV, section 1 of the Alaska Constitution says that the jurisdiction of the courts shall be prescribed by law, the legislature cannot prohibit the exercise of appellate jurisdiction in administrative cases. Prescribe is defined as to establish rules, laws, or directions. [145] Establishing a rule that the superior court does not have intermediate appellate jurisdiction to hear workers' compensation cases prescribes the jurisdiction of the superior court as much as granting the superior court jurisdiction to hear them. The legislature could permissibly remove the superior court's appellate jurisdiction in workers' compensation cases. We have previously stated that the question whether article IV, section 15 of the Alaska Constitution applies to the passage of legislation depends on whether the subject matter of the statute at issue is substantive or procedural; only changes in procedural law require a super-majority for passage. [146] Substantive law creates, defines and regulates rights, while procedural law prescribes the method of enforcing the rights. [147] With the enactment of chapter 10, FSSLA 2005, the legislature took subject matter jurisdiction to hear workers' compensation appeals from the superior court. We recently held that subject matter jurisdiction is the legal authority of a court to hear and decide a particular kind of case [148] and noted that the legislature could properly authorize the superior court and a quasi-judicial agency to hear particular classes of cases. [149] The removal of subject matter jurisdiction to hear appeals in workers' compensation cases from the superior court is substantive because it is directly related to the legislature's constitutional authority to prescribe the jurisdiction of the courts. [150] The legislation was properly enacted.