Judicial review of actions by the commission to revoke, suspend or modify commercial driver's permits or certificates of convenience and necessity, shall be in conformance with relevant subsections of 4.1040 through 4.1044 ASCA, which provide as follows:
(a) A person who has exhausted all administrative remedies available within an agency and who is aggrieved by a final decision in a contested case shall be entitled to judicial review under 4.1040 through 4.1044 ASCA.
(b) Section 4.1040 does not limit the utilization of, or the scope of judicial review available under other means of review, redress, relief, or trial de novo provided by law, and judicial review may not be sought under 4.1040 through 4.1044 ASCA of any proceedings for which, or by any person for whom, the law specifically provides other adequate means of judicial review.
(c) A preliminary, procedural, or intermediate agency action or ruling shall be immediately reviewable only if review of the final agency decision would not provide an adequate remedy.
(d) Proceedings for review may be instituted by filing a petition in the appellate division of the High Court of American Samoa within 30 days after the issuance of the decision to be reviewed, or if rehearing or reconsideration is requested, within 30 days after the decision thereon. Copies of the decision shall be served upon the agency and all parties of record.
(e) The filing of a petition under 4.1041 ASCA shall not stay enforcement of the agency's decision. The agency may grant, or the court may order, a stay on appropriate terms.
(f) Within 30 days after service of the petition, or within further time allowed by the court, the agency shall transmit to the court the original or a certified copy of the record of the proceeding under review.
(g) The review shall be confined to the record. Upon request by any party, the court shall receive briefs and hear oral argument. On motion of any party, the court may, in its discretion, receive any evidence necessary to supplement the record.
(h) The court may not substitute its judgment for that of the agency as to the weight of the evidence on questions of fact. In reviewing the agency's interpretation of the evidence, its factual inferences, and its conclusions of law, the court shall give appropriate weight to the agency's experience, technical competence, and specialized knowledge.
(i) The court may reverse or modify the decision of the agency, or may remand the case for further proceedings, if substantial rights of the petitioner have been prejudiced because the decision of the agency is:
(1) in violation of applicable constitutional or statutory provisions;
(2) in excess of the statutory authority of the agency;
(3) made upon unlawful procedure;
(4) affected by other error of law;
(5) clearly erroneous in view of the reliable, probative, and substantial evidence in the whole record;
(6) arbitrary, capricious, or characterized by abuse of discretion.History: Comm. Commn. Regs. eff 1 Jan 73. Rep. 1.01.