Court Opinion

ID: 9740570
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-08-26 20:37:22.986523+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:24:18.918599
License: Public Domain

J. H. G-illis, P. J.
(concurring). I reluctantly concur in the results because I believe that we cannot sit as a superexamining board and order the defendant to issue a license to the plaintiff. The defendant has failed to establish adequate standards, has delegated its function of grading examinations to unauthorized personnel and has not made an independent determination on the question of whether the applicant has scored a passing grade on the examination. Defendant neglected to advise plaintiff why he did not obtain a passing grade on the design problem and has refused to provide any method of review for an applicant considered by defendant to be lacking in the professional skills of an architect.
To further complicate matters, the defendant, as pointed out in Judge Fitzgerald’s opinion, has destroyed plaintiff’s examination papers.
The final argument of the defendant to the effect that the plaintiff does have a method of review by repeating the biannual examination has no merit and deserves no answer.