Court Opinion

ID: 9789625
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-31 01:39:23.841729+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:37:23.599306
License: Public Domain

HANSEN, Presiding Judge,
specially concurring:
The majority’s decision and explanation of the law as it stands is clearly correct. The standards of the “second” appellate review provided by the Administrative Procedures Act and explained in the majority’s opinion, in effect, neutralizes the appellate review by the district court. A more viable standard of review is expressed by Justice Wilson in her dissent in Parks v. Norman Municipal Hospital, 684 P.2d 548 (Okla.1984). In my opinion, our review should also address the issue of whether the district court’s review was in compliance with its statutory standards. If the district court has not followed its statutorily mandated standard of review, is not its decision erroneous as a matter of law?