Greg Mills v. Abtr

Summary

The court held that exhaustion of administrative remedies did not bar Mills’s declaratory-judgment action because no statutory procedure allowed him to compel a final administrative decision, and the Board could not grant the constitutional relief he sought. The court further held that Mills had standing and presented a ripe controversy as to his first three claims because the Board had investigated him, threatened enforcement, and offered consent orders imposing fines and work restrictions. His fourth claim was unripe because the Board had not initiated the adjudicative proceedings challenged in that claim. The court reversed the appellate decision, affirmed the superior court in part, reversed it in part, and remanded.