exhaustion of administrative remedies doctrine in Mississippi

1995In an Oklahoma case, Lone Star Helicopters, Inc., v. State of Oklahoma, et al., 800 P.2d 235 (Okla1990), the Court stated “[e]x-haustion of an administrative remedy is generally a prerequisite for resort to the courts, but the doctrine will not bar a district court action that bypasses the agency’s own rule-prescribed mode for processing a complaint if the administrative remedy is unavailable, ineffective or would be futile to pursue.” Id. at 237 citing 4 Davis, Administrative Law Treatise § 26:11 at 464 (2d ed. 1983).

1995In an Oklahoma case, Lone Star Helicopters, Inc., v. State of Oklahoma, et al., 800 P.2d 235 (Okla1990), the Court stated “[e]x-haustion of an administrative remedy is generally a prerequisite for resort to the courts, but the doctrine will not bar a district court action that bypasses the agency’s own rule-prescribed mode for processing a complaint if the administrative remedy is unavailable, ineffective or would be futile to pursue.” Id. at 237 citing 4 Davis, Administrative Law Treatise § 26:11 at 464 (2d ed. 1983).

2021Ct. App. 2015), we said that a challenge to a government’s land-use 22 decision that alleges the decision was arbitrary or capricious states a violation of a substantive right, which is not subject to the exhaustion of administrative remedies bar: “When challenges to land-use decisions aspire to constitutional stature, we view those decisions as ‘quasi-legislative’ in nature, and thus sustainable against a substantive due process challenge if there exists therefor ‘any conceivable rational basis.’” Id. (quoting FM Props.

2016Quality v. Weems, 653 So.2d 266 , (Miss.1995) (quoting Ellington & Assocs., Inc., et al. v. Keefe, 410 N.W.2d 857, 860 (Minn.App.1987)) (“[T]he doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies does not require that futile attempts at administrative relief be taken before seeking a judicial determination.”).

2016Quality v. Weems, 653 So. 2d 266 , (Miss. 1995) (quoting Ellington & Assocs., Inc., et al. v. Keefe, 410 N.W.2d 857, 860 (Minn. 25 App. 1987 )) (“[T]he doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies does not require that futile attempts at administrative relief be taken before seeking a judicial determination.”).

1966The Court further stated: The following textbooks hold to the rule that “The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies requires that where an administrative remedy is provided by statute, relief must be sought by exhausting this remedy before the courts will act.” (Citing authorities.) (250 Miss, at 63-64, 157 So.2d at 508 .) See also Morehead v. Mississippi Safety-Responsibility Bureau, 232 Miss. 412 , 99 So.2d 446 (1958); and Scott v. Lowe, 223 Miss. 312 , 78 So.2d 452 (1955).

1966The Court further stated: The following textbooks hold to the rule that “The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies requires that where an administrative remedy is provided by statute, relief must be sought by exhausting this remedy before the courts will act.” (Citing authorities.) (250 Miss, at 63-64, 157 So.2d at 508 .) See also Morehead v. Mississippi Safety-Responsibility Bureau, 232 Miss. 412 , 99 So.2d 446 (1958); and Scott v. Lowe, 223 Miss. 312 , 78 So.2d 452 (1955).

1966This doctrine is well established, is a cardinal principle of practically universal application, and must be borne in mind by the courts in construing a statute providing for review of administrative action. * * * ( 250 Miss. at 61-62 , 157 So.2d at 507 .) Likewise, in Powe v. Forrest County Election Commission, 249 Miss. 757 , 163 So.2d 656 (1964), in upholding the dismissal of an action for a writ of mandamus, the Court held that persons aggrieved by the orders of an election commission must exhaust their administrative remedies as a prerequisite to judicial review. *428 It is obvious from t

1966This doctrine is well established, is a cardinal principle of practically universal application, and must be borne in mind by the courts in construing a statute providing for review of administrative action. * * * ( 250 Miss. at 61-62 , 157 So.2d at 507 .) Likewise, in Powe v. Forrest County Election Commission, 249 Miss. 757 , 163 So.2d 656 (1964), in upholding the dismissal of an action for a writ of mandamus, the Court held that persons aggrieved by the orders of an election commission must exhaust their administrative remedies as a prerequisite to judicial review. *428 It is obvious from t

1966The Court further stated: The following textbooks hold to the rule that “The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies requires that where an administrative remedy is provided by statute, relief must be sought by exhausting this remedy before the courts will act.” (Citing authorities.) (250 Miss, at 63-64, 157 So.2d at 508 .) See also Morehead v. Mississippi Safety-Responsibility Bureau, 232 Miss. 412 , 99 So.2d 446 (1958); and Scott v. Lowe, 223 Miss. 312 , 78 So.2d 452 (1955).

1966The Court further stated: The following textbooks hold to the rule that “The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies requires that where an administrative remedy is provided by statute, relief must be sought by exhausting this remedy before the courts will act.” (Citing authorities.) (250 Miss, at 63-64, 157 So.2d at 508 .) See also Morehead v. Mississippi Safety-Responsibility Bureau, 232 Miss. 412 , 99 So.2d 446 (1958); and Scott v. Lowe, 223 Miss. 312 , 78 So.2d 452 (1955).