Veneman

San Benito Foods v. Veneman

Good Law
1996 Cal. App. LEXIS 1089·50 Cal. App. 4th 1889·58 Cal. Rptr. 2d 571·96 Daily Journal DAR 14097·96 Cal. Daily Op. Serv. 8542
Court of Appeal of CaliforniaNovember 22, 1996H014311California2,719 words

Opinion

Opinion

Mihara, J.

The only questions presented in this appeal are what the correct standard of proof is in an administrative proceeding involving a threatened suspension or revocation of a food processing license and what the correct standard of review is in the superior court when a writ of administrative mandamus is sought to overturn the administrative agency’s decision to impose a stayed suspension of such a license on condition that a sum of money be paid by the licensee. We conclude that the administrative agency correctly utilized the preponderance of the evidence standard of proof, but the superior court erroneously applied the substantial evidence standard of review rather than the appropriate “independent judgment” standard of review. Thus, we reverse the superior court’s order denying the petition and remand this matter to the superior court for review under the appropriate standard.

Facts

Plaintiff is a food processor and holds a food processing license issued by defendant. In September 1991, plaintiff refused to accept tomatoes for processing from real party Moreno Farms. Moreno Farms filed a complaint against plaintiff with defendant. Defendant conducted an investigation…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.