ÿWPCL3 …# VUNa %¯ 0 Nµ 0 Í bÐ w@Ø 4 , 0D; 0@ †¿ 0JE  0T— 0^ë 0hI 0r±# m% 0|< 0†¸ 0> 1uÎ 0dC D3§U">Ú BB)5DC^ AM¡U*î.”F³Úª÷7.Ë1#[ü$ÿW'v~V*vÓÔ+ AO§1Æö1 0D¼2 D/3 B/3˜HP LaserJet 4Si/4SiMX PS 600dpiPSCRIPTÈÚØÚÚØÈÚ0nLHÎ(í€"  Z ‹6Times New Roman Regular¼(&öy$¡¡Ó  ÓÙñÓ Ù(}(2R$¤¤Ý ƒöy!ÝÓ  ÓÙñÓ ÙÝ  ÝÒ°ÒÒ„°ÒÔ€X$ðX¼¼Ôà ` àòòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó- ù- ¤¥¦§D¨e©Uª«¬Ó€¶DÒ 3|x¶(#Ã$òòÚ  Ú0Ú  Úóó("ÿÿ$££Ò  ÒÒ  ÒNational Loans v. Dept. of Financial Institutions - Opinion Ì  ' IB011C20IB011C2 .   2 ÿÿ0Indent1Ô2ÔÔ3  Ô2" ÿÿ0Indent2à0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2, ÿÿ0Indent3à0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô26 ÿÿ0Indent4à0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2@ ÿÿ0Indent5à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  ÔÿU‹ÿÀÀÀ2J ÿÿ0Indent6à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2T ÿÿ0Indent7à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô2^ ÿÿ0Indent8à0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àà0 àÔ2ÔÔ3  Ô !" ÿÿ?AGMSYaioIndent0I.A.1.a.(1)(a)i)a)P ÿÿ8Mac DefaultMac DefaultÓ ` °šXÓ----'ÿÿdxd< Œ 9p`(&Times New Roman d% Line 7 d....7Border 1dd€ /Cþÿ << Gÿÿ< Œ 9p`(Arial $Ý ƒ!ÝÑ  ÑÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÔ€,¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÔ€1ÔÔ€1ÔÓ  Óò òÔ YYY ÔFILEDÔ€1XÔÌÌApril€23,€1997ÌÌCecil€W.€CrowsonÌAppellate€Court€ClerkÔ  Ôó ó ŠÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÔ€,¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€,XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€45„5„403(1)(B)€permits€industrial€loan€and€thrift€companies€toÏcharge€either€a€four€percent€service€charge€or€ð ðthe€actual,€bona€fide,€reasonable€expenses,Ïdirectly€incident€to€the€loan,€paid€or€to€be€paid€.€.€.€to€third€parties,€including,€but€not€limited€to,Ïexpenses€for€title€examination€or€title€insurance,€surveys,€preparation€or€necessary€documents,Ïcredit€reports€and€appraisalsðð€but€not€both.Ì ©Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÔ€,¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€,XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝLater,€in€July€1990,€the€Mississippi€regulators€commenced€administrative€proceedingsÏof€their€own€to€revoke€National€Loansðð€license€to€do€business€in€Mississippi.€€This€action€wasÏeventually€settled.Ì  Ý ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÔ€,¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€,XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝWe€disagree€with€National€Loansðð€assertion€that€the€¢intervenors£ðð€arguments€are€eitherÏmoot€or€not€properly€before€the€court.€€The€¢intervenors£€are€aggrieved€persons€for€the€purposeÏof€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€4„5„322(a)(1)€(Supp.€1996).€€While€the€Department€of€FinancialÏInstitutions€has€already€divulged€its€enforcement€records€concerning€the€intervenors,€the€issueÏconcerning€the€disclosure€of€proprietary€information€contained€in€the€Departmentððs€enforcementÏrecords€is€one€of€great€public€interest€and€importance€to€the€administration€of€justice€and€isÏlikewise€capable€of€repetition€yet€evading€review.€€òòWalker€v.€Dunn,óó€498€S.W.2d€102,€104Ï(Tenn.€1972)€(recognizing€an€exception€to€the€¢mootness£€doctrine€for€issues€of€great€publicÏinterest€and€importance);€òò¢Bemis£€Pentecostal€Church€v.€State,óó€731€S.W.2d€897,€903€(Tenn.Ï1987)€(recognizing€an€exception€to€the€¢mootness£€doctrine€for€issues€capable€of€repetition€yetÏevading€review).Ì íÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÔ€,¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€,XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝThe€Tennessee€Supreme€Court€has€equated€Tenn.€Const.€art.€XI,€ðð€8€with€theÏFourteenth€Amendment€in€considering€a€challenge€to€a€statute€on€the€ground€that€it€permittedÏprosecutorial€selectivity.€€òò¢Goldston£€v.€City€of€Harriman,óó€565€S.W.2d€858,€861€(Tenn.€1978).Ì ùÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÔ€,¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€,XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝPrior€to€the€United€States€Supreme€Courtððs€decision€in€òòUnited€States€v.€Armstrongóó,Ïthe€state€and€federal€courts€had€adopted€several€labels€for€the€requisite€showing€needed€to€beÏentitled€to€discovery.€€The€most€common€label€was€ð ð¢colorable£€basis."€€òòSee,€e.g.,óó€òòUnited€StatesÏv.€Lopezóó,€71€F.3d€954,€963€(1st€Cir.€1995);€òòState€v.€¢Palmgren£,óó€646€P.2d€1091,€1096€(¢Kan£.Ï1982).€€Other€courts€required€a€ð ð¢nonfrivolous£€showing,ðð€òòsee,€e.g.,€United€States€v.ÏGreenwood,óó€796€F.2d€49,€52€(4th€Cir.€1986);€òòJones€v.€Missouri€Dental€Bd.,óó€687€S.W.2dÏ579,€581€(Mo.€Ct.€App.€1985),€or€a€ð ðprima€facieðð€showing.€€òòSee,€e.g.,€United€States€v.Ï¢Parham£,óó€16€F.3d€844,€846€(8th€Cir.€1994);€òò¢Federov£€v.€United€States,óó€580€A.2d€600,€608Ï(D.C.€1990).Ì ÁÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÔ€,¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€,XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝWe€do€not€decide€in€this€case€whether€a€regulatory€agency€must€in€all€circumstancesÏprovide€a€person€asserting€selective€enforcement€with€access€to€its€enforcement€files€or€whether€Ïan€explanation€of€its€decision€will€suffice.Ì QÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÔ€,¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€,XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝA€Department€representative€stated€he€would€not€have€hesitated€to€commence€formalÏproceedings€had€the€Department€discovered€that€American€General€had€been€forgingÏdocuments.€€The€administrative€law€judge€also€noted€that€the€Department€had€revoked€theÏregistration€of€the€only€other€entity€ð ðshown€to€have€engaged€in€fraudulent€activities€throughÏforging€documents.ððÌ õÝ ƒ!ÝÑ#€d#ÑÔ€,ÔÔ€,¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÝ ƒ$ÝÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÔ€,XÔà àòòÚ  ÚÚ  ÚóóÝ  ÝWe€need€not€rely€on€the€presumption€that€persons€in€a€regulated€business€are€aware€ofÏthe€applicable€regulatory€statutes€and€regulations.€€One€of€National€Loansðð€branch€managersÏread€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€45„5„403(1)(B)€to€a€corporate€executive€who€informed€her€thatÏNational€Loans€had€chosen€to€ð ðinterpretðð€the€law€differently.€€In€addition,€the€company€wasÏsufficiently€aware€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€45„5„403€to€understand€that€the€maximum€service€feeÏin€Tennessee€was€4%,€while€the€maximum€fee€in€Mississippi€was€only€2%.€€ÌPtPtHHÚ(ÿáÿâùFG(üHHÚ(d'hStyl{WP}01•ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃà Ãà Ãà Ãà Ãà ÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÃÐ ÐÐHHÐÐ  ÐÐ2ÐÐÿÿ¸æ$ÿÐÐHHÐÐÐÐÐÐÐÐ  ÐÐ ÐÐ ÐÑÑÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÑ € ÑÑ<Px–ÈÑÒÒÒ443!#4ÒÒ$ *$ÒÒ$*$ÒÒ ÿKK ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÒ  Geneva ÒÓ.,ÓÓÓÓ6ÓÓ ÓßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßßÑGenevaÑÑ ÑÒ  h HD: Geneva ÒÒ  h HD: Geneva Ò€ ‚ƒCþÿ<< CÿÿƒLevel 1Level 2Level 3Level 4Level 5($$””ò òÚ  Ú1Ú  Úó ó„„'÷ÿ dxdüÿP PdÝ ƒ!ÝÔ . ÔÔ€,ÔÔ€,¼ÔÓ  ÓÝ  ÝÑ Ü ÑÒ  ÒÒ ° ÒÒ  ÒÒ „ ÒÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ  ÑÑ\R AØ'\ÑÑ€ÑÑ7€Nȼ¼ddÈ7ÑÑ  ÑÑ  Ñ›Þ ÞÌà@ àÔ€,„Ôò òIN€THE€COURT€OF€APPEALS€OF€TENNESSEE̜ـ€ÙßR€02/A1-j|,4` ç `€€@ÿRß›à@ àMIDDLE€SECTION€AT€NASHVILLEÌÌÔ€,¼ÔÌó óNATIONAL€LOANS,€INC.,à àà à)ÌJackson,€Tennessee,à àà àà à)ÌMemphis,€Tennessee,à àà àà à)ÌMilan,€Tennessee,à àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àPetitioner/Appellant,à àà àœ)à àDavidson€Chancery›Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àNo.€92„1518„IÌ¢VS£.à àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)à àAppeal€No.ÌœTENNESSEE›€DEPARTMENT€OFà àœ)à à01A01„9506„CH„00241›ÌFINANCIAL€INSTITUTIONS,à à)Ìà àà àà àà àà àà à)Ìà àRespondent/Appellee.à àà à)ÌÌÌà@ àAPPEAL€FROM€THE€CHANCERY€COURT€FOR€DAVIDSON€COUNTYÌà@ àAT€NASHVILLE,€TENNESSEEÌÌà@ àTHE€HONORABLE€IRVIN€H.€KILCREASE,€JR.,€CHANCELLORÌÌÌòòFor€the€Petitioner/Appellantóó:à àà àà àà àòòFor€theÏRespondent/Appelleeóó:ÌÌWilliam€B.€¢Hubbard£à àà àà àà àà àCharles€W.€¢Burson£ÌBrenner€Lackey€Van€Meterà àà àà àà àAttorney€General€andÏReporterÌWeed,€¢Hubbard£,€Berry€&€DoughtyÌNashville,€Tennesseeà àà àà àà àà àMichael€E.€MooreÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àSolicitor€GeneralÌ¢W.J.£€Michael€CodyÌBurch,€Porter€and€Johnsonà àà àà àà àJanet€M.€¢Kleinfelter£ÌMemphis,€Tennesseeà àà àà àà àà àAssistant€Attorney€GeneralÌÌLynn€¢Fitch£€MitchellÌ¢Holcomb£,€Dunbar,€¢Connell£,€¢Chaffin£€&€œWillardà àòòFor€the€Intervenorsóó:›ÌJackson,€MississippiÌœà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àVal€Sanford›Ìœà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àGullett,€Sanford,€RobinsonÏà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà à&€MartinÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àà àNashville,€TennesseeÌÌ›Ìà@ àÔ€,„Ôò òAFFIRMED€IN€PART;€REVERSED€IN€PART;Ìà@ àAND€REMANDEDó óÌÌÔ€,¼ÔÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,ÏJUDGEÇÑ ° ÑÑ „ ÑÓ€ÓÔ€,„Ôà@ àò òòòO€P€I€N€I€O€Nóóó óÌÔ€,¼ÔÌà àThis€appeal€involves€the€revocation€of€the€certificates€of€registration€ofÏthree€branch€offices€of€an€industrial€loan€and€thrift€company.€€TheÏCommissioner€of€Revenue,€sitting€for€the€Commissioner€of€FinancialÏInstitutions,€revoked€the€certificates€after€determining€that€the€companyððs€realÏestate€loan€charges€and€its€handling€of€credit€life€insurance€death€claimsÏviolated€the€Industrial€Loan€and€Thrift€Act.€€The€company€sought€judicialÏreview€in€the€Chancery€Court€for€Davidson€County.€€After€remanding€the€caseÏfor€discovery€relating€to€the€companyððs€selective€enforcement€claim,€the€trialÏcourt€affirmed€the€revocation€of€two€of€the€branch€officesðð€certificates€andÏreversed€the€revocation€of€the€third€officeððs€certificate.€€The€company€assertsÏon€this€appeal€that€the€administrative€law€judge€improperly€limited€additionalÏdiscovery€concerning€its€selective€enforcement€claim,€that€the€Department€ofÏFinancial€Institutions€was€selectively€enforcing€the€Industrial€Loan€and€ThriftÏAct,€and€that€the€revocation€of€the€certificates€of€its€two€branch€offices€wasÏnot€supported€by€substantial€and€material€evidence.€€The€Department€assertsÏthat€the€trial€court€erred€by€reversing€œits›€revocation€of€œthe›€third€branchÏofficeððs€certificate.€€We€have€determined€that€additional€discovery€concerningÏthe€selective€enforcement€claim€was€not€warranted,€that€the€Department€didÏnot€selectively€enforce€the€Industrial€Loan€and€Thrift€Act,€and€that€theÏevidence€supports€the€revocation€of€all€three€branch€officesðð€certificates€ofÏregistration.ÌÌà@ àò òI.ó óÌÌà àNational€Loans,€Inc.€is€an€industrial€loan€and€thrift€company€originallyÏincorporated€in€Mississippi€in€1974.€€It€opened€its€first€Tennessee€branchÍoffice€in€Milan€in€1986.€€Over€the€next€two€years,€it€opened€other€branchÏoffices€in€¢Collierville£€and€Jackson.€€National€Loans€was€operating€œtwenty›Ïbranch€offices€œin›€Tennessee€and€Mississippi€at€the€outset€of€this€enforcementÏproceedings.ÌÌà àIn€1990€the€Department€of€Financial€Institutions€learned€that€œanÏindustrial€loan€and€thrift›€company€doing€business€in€both€Mississippi€andÏTennessee€had€been€expelled€from€the€Mississippi€Independent€Association.€ÏDuring€a€review€of€the€examination€records€of€three€œindustrial€loan€and€thriftÏcompanies›€doing€business€in€both€Mississippi€and€Tennessee,€the€€assistantÏcommissioner€responsible€for€overseeing€the€regulation€of€the€loan€and€thriftÏindustry€in€Tennessee€discovered€a€transaction€in€which€National€œLoansðð›Ïbranch€office€in€Jackson€had€deposited€the€proceeds€from€œa€joint›€credit€lifeÏinsurance€policy€in€its€own€account€rather€than€immediately€paying€over€theÏproceeds€to€its€customerððs€estate.€€The€assistant€commissioner€eventuallyÏordered€examinations€of€all€of€National€œLoansðð›€branch€offices€in€TennesseeÏafter€verifying€that€the€customerððs€estate€had€never€received€the€insuranceÏproceeds€and€after€a€review€of€six€to€eight€other€examination€files€revealedÏthat€the€company€consistently€retained€credit€life€proceeds€rather€than€payingÏthem€over€to€its€customersðð€estates.€ÌÌà àDepartment€representatives€examined€National€œLoansðð›€three€TennesseeÏbranch€offices€in€August€1990.€€They€were€unable€to€examine€the€œcredit›€lifeÏtransactions€œat€the€Milan€branch€office€because€it€did›€not€provide€them€theÏrequired€insurance€claim€log.€€The€examinations€uncovered€one€loan€at€theÏJackson€branch€office€and€three€loans€at€the€Collierville€branch€office€in€whichÏthe€company€had€attempted€to€convert€the€credit€life€insurance€proceeds€to€itsÏown€use.€€In€these€transactions,€œNational›€œLoansðð›€employees€had€forgedÍendorsements€on€insurance€checks€made€payable€to€its€œcustomersð𛀜estates›€andÏhad€deposited€these€checks€in€a€central€company€suspense€account.€€Later,€theÏcompany€issued€one€or€more€checks€to€their€customersðð€estates€but€againÏdeposited€these€checks€into€a€company€account€over€another€œforged›Ïendorsement.ÌÌà àThe€examinations€also€uncovered€fourteen€other€transactions€in€whichÏall€three€branch€offices€had€violated€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€45„5„403(1)(B)Ï(Supp.€1996)€by€charging€customers€a€four€percent€service€charge€in€additionÏto€third„party€expenses.× ƒ3 ××  ×€€These€transactions€represented€every€real€estate€loanÏmade€by€National€œLoansð𛀀three€branch€offices€in€Tennessee.ÌÌà àThe€Mississippi€Department€of€Banking€and€Consumer€FinanceÏcommenced€a€special€investigation€into€National€œLoansðð›€use€of€the€proceeds€ofÏthe€joint€credit€life€insurance€policies€on€September€14,€1989.œ× ƒ4 ××  ×›€€Less€than€oneÏweek€later,€National€œLoans›€mailed€the€insurance€proceeds€to€the€estates€of€itsÏinsured€customers.€€In€similar€fashion,€National€œLoans›€began€to€refund€theÏovercharges€on€its€real€estate€loans€in€Tennessee€after€the€DepartmentÏcommenced€œthe›€special€œexamination€at€issue€in€this€case.›ÌÌà àArmed€with€the€examination€results,€the€Department€of€FinancialÏInstitutions€€commenced€administrative€proceedings€to€revoke€the€registrationÍcertificates€of€National€œLoansðð›€three€branch€offices€in€Tennessee.€€At€theÏhearing€before€an€administrative€law€judge,€the€Department€presentedÏMississippi€and€Tennessee€regulators€as€well€as€former€National€œLoans›Ïemployees€to€testify€about€National€œLoansðð›€corporate€policies€with€regard€toÏreal€estate€loan€charges€and€credit€life€insurance€death€claims.€€National€LoansÏstipulated€during€the€hearing€that€its€company„wide€policy€was€to€charge€bothÏthe€four€percent€service€charge€and€the€third„party€expenses€on€its€real€estateÏloans.€€National€œLoansðð›€president€and€vice€president€for€Tennessee€operationsÏalso€conceded€that€the€company€routinely€forged€endorsements€on€checksÏpayable€to€the€estates€of€their€deceased€borrowers€and€deposited€these€checksÏin€a€corporate€suspense€account.€€ÌÌà àAfter€the€hearing,€National€Loans€learned€that€the€Department€had€alsoÏexamined€American€General€Finance,€Inc.,€a€Tennessee€industrial€loan€andÏthrift€company,€for€collecting€excessive€fees€in€real€estate€transactions.€WithÏthe€Departmentððs€permission,€National€Loans€reviewed€American€GeneralððsÏexamination€file€and€discovered€that€the€Department€had€permitted€AmericanÏGeneral€to€reimburse€a€number€of€customers€for€loan€overcharges€œwithout›Ïcommencing€formal€enforcement€proceedings.€€œThe€administrative€law€judgeÏlater€denied€National€Loansðð€request€to€reopen€the€record€to€present€evidenceÏof€discrimination€by€the€Department.ÌÌà àOn€January€23,€1992,€the€administrative€law€judge€issued€an€initialÏorder€finding€that€the€certificates€of€registration€of€all€three€of€NationalÏLoansðð€branch€offices€in€Tennessee€should€be€revoked€because€of€the€illegalÏreal€estate€loan€charges€and€the€fraudulent€handling€of€credit€life€insuranceÏproceeds.€€In€April€1992€the€Commissioner€of€Financial€Institutions€affirmedÏthe€initial€order.€€National€Loans€filed€a€petition€for€review€in€the€ChanceryÍCourt€for€Davidson€County€in€May€1992€and€continued€to€review€AmericanÏGeneralððs€examination€files€for€evidence€of€additional€overcharges.€€In€AugustÏ1992€National€Loans€sought€the€trial€courtððs€permission€to€introduce€additionalÏevidence€supporting€its€selective€enforcement€claim€and€also€requested€the€trialÏcourt€to€remand€the€case€for€further€discovery€on€the€issue.€€The€trial€courtÏthereupon€remanded€the€case€to€the€administrative€law€judge€to€allowÏdiscovery€and€further€consideration€of€National€Loansðð€selective€enforcementÏclaim.ÌÌà àThe€remand€order€triggered€a€discovery€dispute€that€lasted€eighteenÏmonths.€€National€Loans€demanded€virtually€unlimited€access€to€all€theÏDepartmentððs€enforcement€records€concerning€every€industrial€loan€and€thriftÏcompany€doing€business€in€Tennessee;€while€the€Department€sought€to€limitÏthe€discovery€to€American€Generalððs€examination€files.€€The€administrativeÏlaw€judge€permitted€National€Loans€to€submit€interrogatories€to€theÏDepartmentððs€examiners€concerning€their€memories€of€violations€by€anyÏindustrial€loan€and€thrift€company.€€As€the€dispute€wore€on,€the€administrativeÏlaw€judge€ordered€the€Department€to€make€available€examination€filesÏinvolving€first€three,€then€eleven€other€industrial€loan€and€thrift€companies.€ÏThe€administrative€law€judge€also€directed€that€these€records€be€placed€underÏseal€and€made€available€only€to€National€Loansðð€attorneys.€€ÌÌ›à àBoth€parties€appealed€the€administrative€law€judgeððs€discovery€orders€toÏthe€trial€court.€€œAfter€the€trial€court€quashed€National€Loansðð€efforts€toÏsubpoena€additional€witnesses€after€the€discovery€deadline,€National€LoansððÏlawyers€requested€the€trial€court€to€lift€the›€protective€order€œto€enable›€theirÏclient€to€review€the€documents€and€to€aid€in€the€presentation€of€its€selectiveÏenforcement€claim.€€The€œtrial›€court€denied€the€motion,€but€not€before€œitÍpermitted€four€other€industrial€loan€and€thrift€companies€to€intervene€toÏprotect€the€confidentiality€of€their€records.ÌÌà àOn€March€4,€1994,€the€administrative€law€judge€entered€an€initial€orderÏconfirming€the€findings€of€fact€in€its€January€23,€1992€order€as€well€as€itsÏconclusion€that€the€certificates€of€registration€of€National€Loansðð€three€branchÏoffices€in€Tennessee€should€be€revoked.€€The€administrative€law€judge€alsoÏfound€that€the€evidence€presented€following€the€remand€did€not€substantiateÏNational€Loansðð€selective€enforcement€claim.€€National€Loans€appealed€theÏinitial€order€to€the€Commissioner€of€Financial€Institutions.ÌÌà àThe€Commissioner€of€Financial€Institutions€¢recused£€himself€becauseÏNational€Loans€had€filed€a€civil€rights€action€against€him€in€the€Circuit€CourtÏfor€Gibson€County€alleging€that€he€was€using€the€Industrial€Loan€and€ThriftÏAct€to€harass€and€selectively€prosecute€the€company.€€The€Governor,€actingÏpursuant€to€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€4„5„302(e)(1)€(1991),€appointed€theÏCommissioner€of€Revenue€to€preside€over€the€enforcement€proceedings€inÏplace€of€the€Commissioner€of€Financial€Institutions.€€Thereafter,€theÏCommissioner€of€Revenue€denied€National€Loansðð€renewed€motion€to€lift€theÏprotective€order€and,€on€June€10,€1994,€entered€a€final€order€adopting€theÏadministrative€law€judgeððs€findings.€€The€Commissioner€of€Revenue€revokedÏthe€certificates€of€registration€issued€to€National€Loansðð€three€›branch€offices€inÏTennessee.€€In€doing€so,€the€Commissioner€noted€œthat€ð ðthe€record€reflectsÏtestimony€by€company€employees€that€there€was€a€company€policy€andÏcontinuing€practice€with€regard€to€charges€in€excess€of€the€amounts€statutorilyÏallowed€on€real€estate€loans.ððÌÌà àThe€Department€of€Financial€Institutions€filed€the€supplemental€recordÏwith€the€trial€court€in€July€1994.€€On€March€27,€1995,€the€trial€court€filed€aÏmemorandum€opinion€affirming€the€revocation€of€the€certificates€ofÏregistration€of€National€Loansðð€branch€offices€in€Jackson€and€¢Collierville£.€€TheÏtrial€court€reversed€the€revocation€of€the€Milan€branch€officeððs€certification€ofÏregistration€on€two€grounds.€€First,€the€trial€court€pointed€out€that€there€wasÏno€proof€that€the€Milan€branch€office€had€misappropriated€the€proceeds€ofÏjoint€credit€life€insurance€policies;€second,€the€court€concluded€that€theÏCommissioner€acted€arbitrarily€by€applying€the€character€and€fitness€standardsÏin€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€45„5„201(a)€(Supp.€1996)€to€an€industrial€loan€and€thriftÏcompany€that€was€already€operating.ÌÌà@ àò òII.ó óÌà@ àòòò òNational€Loansðð€Selective€Enforcement€Claimó óóóÌÌà àWe€turn€first€to€the€issues€surrounding€National€Loansðð€selectiveÏenforcement€claim.€€National€Loans€asserts€that€the€administrative€law€judgeÏimproperly€limited€its€ability€to€›substantiate€œthis€claim€and€that€the€proofÏestablishes€that€the€Department€was€selectively€enforcing€the€Industrial€LoanÏand€Thrift€Act.€€The€intervening€industrial€loan€and€thrift€companies€assertÏthat€the€Department€should€not€have€been€required€to€divulge€the€enforcementÏrecords€pertaining€to€them€because€National€Loans€had€not€made€a€thresholdÏshowing€that€it€was€entitled€to€additional€discovery.¢× ƒ5 ××  ×£€€We€have€determined€thatÍNational€Loans€failed€at€the€outset€to€come€forward€with€some€credibleÏevidence€tending€to€show€that€improper€selective€enforcement€had€occurred.€ÏAccordingly,€we€¢pretermit£€the€discovery€issues€and€find€that€the€trial€courtÏerred€by€remanding€the€case€for€additional€discovery€concerning€NationalÏLoansðð€selective€enforcement€claim.ÌÌà@ àò òA.Ìà@ àòòSelective€Enforcement€Claims€in€Generalóóó óÌÌà àState€and€local€officials€have€broad€discretion€with€regard€to€theirÏenforcement€and€prosecution€decisions€as€long€as€they€have€a€reasonable€basisÏto€believe€that€a€violation€of€a€statute€or€regulation€has€been€committed.€€òòSeeÏ¢Bordenkircher£€v.€Hayesóó,€434€U.S.€357,€364,€98€S.€Ct.€663,€668€(1978);ÏòòPatterson€v.€Huntóó,€682€S.W.2d€508,€517€(Tenn.€Ct.€App.€1984).€€UnwarrantedÏjudicial€intervention€in€enforcement€or€prosecution€decisions€can€chillÏenforcement€of€the€law€and€can€hamper€or€even€frustrate€governmentÏeffectiveness.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Armstrong,€óó___€U.S.€___,€___,€116€S.€Ct.Ï1480,€1486€(1996);€òò¢Wayte£€v.€United€States,óó€470€U.S.€598,€607„08,€105€S.€Ct.Ï1524,€1530„31€(1985).€€Thus,€the€doctrine€of€separation€of€powers€embodiedÏin€Tenn.€Const.€art.€II,€ðððð€1€and€2€counsels€the€courts€to€proceed€cautiouslyÏwhen€asked€to€scrutinize€enforcement€or€prosecution€decisions€by€state€andÏlocal€officials.ÌÌà àRegulation€based€on€personal€dislike,€vendetta,€or€some€otherÏimpermissible€consideration€is€repugnant€to€the€American€tradition€of€the€ruleÏof€law.€€òòSeeóó€òò¢Futernick£€v.€Sumpter€Township,óó€78€F.3d€1051,€1059€(6th€Cir.Í1996).€€Accordingly,€€a€public€officialððs€enforcement€discretion€is€subject€toÏconstitutional€constraints.€€òòUnited€States€v.€¢Batchelder£,óó€442€U.S.€114,€125,€99ÏS.€Ct.€2198,€2204„05€(1979).€€One€of€these€constraints,€imposed€by€the€EqualÏProtection€Clause€of€the€Fourteenth€Amendment,€Tenn.€Const.€art.€I,€ðð€8,€andÏTenn.€Const.€art.€XI,€ðð€8,¢× ƒ6 ××  ×£€is€that€prosecution€or€enforcement€decisions€mayÏnot€be€based€on€some€impermissible€consideration.€€òò¢Wayte£€v.€United€Statesóó,Ï470€U.S.€at€608,€105€S.€Ct.€at€1531;€òòState€v.€Martinóó,€719€S.W.2d€522,€525Ï(Tenn.€1986);€òòIrvin€v.€City€of€Clarksvilleóó,€767€S.W.2d€649,€654€(Tenn.€Ct.ÏApp.€1988).€€This€ð ðmurky€corner€of€equal€protection€lawðð€is€commonlyÏknown€as€ð ðselective€enforcementðð€or€ð ðselective€prosecution.ðð€€òò¢LeClair£€v.ÏSaunders,óó€627€F.2d€606,€608€(2d€Cir.€1980).ÌÌà àPersons€asserting€selective€enforcement€claims€have€a€heavy€burden€toÏovercome€the€presumption€that€public€officials€are€performing€their€duties€inÏgood€faith,€òòWilliams€v.€American€Plan€Corp.,óó€216€Tenn.€435,€441,€392ÏS.W.2d€920,€923€(1965),€and€in€accordance€with€the€law.€€òò¢Reeder£€v.€Holt,óó€220ÏTenn.€428,€435„36,€418€S.W.2d€249,€252€(1967).€€They€must€prove€more€thanÏthat€the€public€official€has€enforced€the€law€in€some€instances€but€not€inÏothers.€€òòState€v.€Martinóó,€719€S.W.2d€at€525;€òòIrvin€v.€City€of€Clarksvilleóó,€767ÏS.W.2d€at€654.€€Equal€protection€does€not€require€that€all€evils€of€the€sameÏgenus€be€eradicated€or€none€at€all.€€òòRailway€Express€Agency,€Inc.€v.€NewÏYork,óó€336€U.S.€106,€110,€69€S.€Ct.€463,€466€(1949).€€Accordingly,€there€is€noÏright€to€have€the€law€go€unenforced€even€if€other€persons€who€may€be€equallyÏor€more€culpable€have€gone€unpunished.€€òò¢Futernick£€v.€Sumpter€Township,óó€78ÏF.3d€at€1056.€€ÌÌà àPersons€claiming€selective€enforcement€must€prove€that€the€enforcementÏdecision€had€a€discriminatory€purpose€and€has€produced€a€discriminatoryÏeffect.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Armstrong,óó€___€U.S.€at€___,€116€S.€Ct.€at€1487;Ïòò¢Wayte£€v.€United€States,óó€470€U.S.€at€608„09,€105€S.€Ct.€at€1531.€€Thus,€inÏorder€to€make€out€a€prima€facie€case€of€selective€enforcement,€they€mustÏprove€(1)€that€they€have€been€singled€out€for€prosecution€while€othersÏsimilarly€situated€have€generally€not€been€prosecuted€for€the€same€type€ofÏconduct€and€(2)€that€the€decision€to€prosecute€them€rests€on€an€impermissibleÏconsideration.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Hazel,óó€696€F.2d€473,€474€(6th€Cir.€1983);ÏòòUnited€States€v.€¢Berrios£,óó€501€F.2d€1207,€1211€(2d€Cir.€1974).ÌÌà àWith€regard€to€the€first€element€of€a€selective€enforcement€claim,€proofÏthat€others€have€not€been€prosecuted€for€essentially€the€same€type€of€conductÏmust€consist€of€evidence€that€(1)€other€non„prosecuted€offenders€engaged€inÏessentially€the€same€conduct,€(2)€the€non„prosecuted€offenders€violated€theÏsame€statute€or€regulation€that€the€claimant€is€accused€of€violating,€and€(3)€theÏmagnitude€of€the€non„prosecuted€offendersðð€violations€was€not€materiallyÏdifferent€from€that€of€the€person€claiming€selective€enforcement.€€òòUnitedÏStates€v.€Cyprian,óó€756€F.€Supp.€388,€393€(N.D.€Ind.€1991).€€TheÏimpermissible€considerations€required€by€the€second€element€of€the€claimÏconsist€of€considerations€based€on€race,€gender,€religion,€or€some€otherÏarbitrary€classification€such€as€the€exercise€of€statutory€or€constitutionalÏrights.€€òò¢Wayte£€v.€United€States,óó€470€U.S.€at€608,€105€S.€Ct.€1531;€òò¢Futernick£€v.ÏSumpter€Township,óó€78€F.3d€at€1056„59.€ÌÌ€à@ àò òB.Ìà@ àòòDiscovery€With€Regard€to€Selective€Enforcement€Claimsóóó óÌÌà àSelective€enforcement€claims€are€difficult€to€prove.€€They€generallyÏrequire€evidence€gleaned€from€government€files€that€are€not€generally€subjectÏto€discovery.€€òò¢Wayte£€v.€United€States,óó€470€U.S.€at€624,€105€S.€Ct.€at€1539Ï(Marshall,€J.,€dissenting);€òòUnited€States€v.€¢Bourgeois£,óó€964€F.2d€935,€938€(9thÏCir.€1992);€òòUnited€States€v.€¢Heidecke£,óó€900€F.2d€1155,€1158€(7th€Cir.€1990).€ÏThus,€when€persons€claiming€selective€enforcement€request€access€toÏgovernment€enforcement€records€in€order€to€obtain€evidence€to€prove€theirÏclaims,€the€courts€must€balance€the€governmentððs€legitimate€interests€withÏthose€of€the€party€seeking€to€substantiate€a€selective€enforcement€claim.€€ÌÌà àBecause€of€the€unavailability€of€evidence€to€substantiate€a€selectiveÏprosecution€claim,€the€courts€have€generally€applied€a€lesser€standard€of€proofÏto€warrant€discovery€than€is€required€ultimately€to€prove€selectiveÏenforcement.€€òòUnited€States€v.€¢Berrios£,óó€501€F.2d€at€1211„12.€€In€order€to€beÏentitled€to€discovery,€a€party€claiming€selective€enforcement€must€comeÏforward€with€some€credible€evidence€tending€to€show€the€existence€ofÏdiscriminatory€effect€and€discriminatory€intent.€€òòUnited€States€v.€Armstrong,óóÏ___€U.S.€at€___,€116€S.€Ct.€at€1488.¢× ƒ7 ××  ×£ÌÌà@ àòòò òC.Ìà@ àNational€Loansðð€threshold€Showingó óóóÌÌà àNational€Loansðð€threshold€showing€of€selective€enforcement€consisted€ofÏevidence€of€the€Departmentððs€enforcement€activities€involving€AmericanÏGeneral.€€National€Loans€did€not€claim€to€be€a€member€of€a€protected€classÏand€did€not€attribute€an€improper,€discriminatory€motive€to€the€Department.€ÏRather,€it€simply€asserted€that€the€Department€had€not€commencedÏenforcement€proceedings€against€American€General€even€though€the€companyÏhad€collected€the€same€fees€and€had€violated€the€same€statute.ÌÌà àA€regulatory€agencyððs€decision€to€enforce€a€statute€or€regulation€inÏsome€cases€but€not€in€others€may€entitle€the€person€subjected€to€formalÏenforcement€proceedings€to€an€explanation€from€the€agency.€€òòBaltimore€Gas€&ÏElec.€Co.€v.€¢Heintz£,óó€760€F.2d€1408,€1419€(4th€Cir.€1985).€€In€this€case,€theÏDepartment€went€beyond€providing€an€explanation€and€actually€grantedÏNational€Loans€access€to€the€enforcement€files€concerning€American€General.× ƒ8 ××  ×€ÏThese€records€contained€no€evidence€of€improper€motive€and€alsoÏdemonstrated€that€American€General€had€not€engaged€in€the€same€type€ofÏconduct€as€National€Loans.ÌÌà àThe€Departmentððs€enforcement€records€did€not€indicate€that€AmericanÏGeneral€had€misappropriated€credit€life€insurance€proceeds€by€forgingÏendorsements€on€insurance€checks.× ƒ9 ××  ×€€In€addition,€they€demonstrated€thatÏAmerican€General€had€not€engaged€in€the€same€type€of€conduct€as€NationalÍLoans.€€All€three€of€National€Loansðð€branch€offices€in€Tennessee€had€violatedÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€45„5„403(1)(B)€in€every€real€estate€loan€they€had€made.€ÏOn€the€other€hand,€American€General€had€violated€the€general€usury€laws€inÏapproximately€seventy€of€its€400,000€accounts.€€These€loans€were€federallyÏexempt€from€state€regulation€under€the€Industrial€Loan€and€Thrift€Act,€andÏAmerican€General€had€€reimbursed€it€customers.€€€€ÌÌà àAt€the€time€National€Loans€first€asserted€its€selective€prosecution€claimÏin€the€trial€court,€the€evidence€showed€convincingly€that€American€GeneralÏhad€not€violated€the€same€statute€that€National€Loans€was€accused€of€violatingÏand€that€the€magnitude€of€American€Generalððs€violations€was€not€the€same€asÏthat€of€National€Loans.€€Accordingly,€the€trial€court€should€have€found€thatÏNational€Loans€had€not€presented€credible€evidence€of€selective€enforcementÏand,€therefore,€should€have€denied€its€request€to€remand€the€case€to€theÏadministrative€law€judge€for€additional€discovery€to€substantiate€its€selectiveÏenforcement€claim.€€ÌÌà@ àò òIII.ó óÌÓÓà@ àòòò òApplication€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€45„5„201(a)(1)ÌÓ€Óà@ àto€Revocation€Proceedingsó óóóÌÌà àWe€turn€next€to€the€trial€courtððs€conclusion€that€the€general€fitnessÏrequirements€in€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€45„5„201(a)(1)€cannot€provide€a€basis€forÏrevoking€the€registration€of€an€industrial€loan€and€thrift€company.€€We€do€notÏagree€with€the€trial€courtððs€restrictive€interpretation€that€the€generalÏqualification€for€registration€apply€only€to€applicants€for€initial€registration.ÌÌà àWhen€construing€a€statute,€the€courts€must€ascertain€and€give€the€fullestÏpossible€effect€to€the€legislative€purpose€expressed€in€the€words€of€the€statuteÏitself.€€òòSharp€v.€Richardson,óó€937€S.W.2d€846,€849€(Tenn.€1996);€òò¢Pursell£€v.ÏFirst€Am.€¢Natððl£€Bank,óó€937€S.W.2d€838,€840€(Tenn.€1996).€€We€must€deriveÏthe€statuteððs€purpose€from€the€plain€and€ordinary€meaning€of€its€language,Ïòò¢Tuggle£€v.€¢Allright£€Parking€¢Sys£.,€Inc.,óó€922€S.W.2d€105,€107€(Tenn.€1996),Ïwithout€unduly€restricting€or€expanding€the€statuteððs€application€or€coverage.€Ïòò¢Worley£€v.€¢Weigels£,€Inc.,óó€919€S.W.2d€589,€593€(Tenn.€1996).€€€€ÌÌà àThe€stated€purpose€of€the€Industrial€Loan€and€Thrift€Act€is€to€provideÏthe€people€of€Tennessee€the€ð ðfacilities€and€resources€of€regulated€lendingÏinstitutions€to€meet€their€needs€for€loans€at€rates€and€charges€reasonablyÏcommensurate€with€economic€realities.ðð€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€45„5„101(a)Ï(1993).€€All€industrial€loan€and€thrift€companies€desiring€to€do€business€inÏTennessee€must€obtain€a€certificate€of€registration€from€the€Commissioner€ofÏFinancial€Institutions€for€each€one€of€their€proposed€branch€offices.€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€45„5„103€(1993).€€In€order€to€qualify€for€a€certificate€ofÏregistration,€an€applicant€must€ð ðdemonstrate€such€experience,€character€andÏgeneral€fitness€as€to€command€the€confidence€of€the€public€and€warrant€theÏbelief€that€the€business€to€be€operated€thereunder€will€be€operated€lawfully€andÏfairly.ðð€€òòSeeóó€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€45„5„201(a)(1).ÌÌà àA€company€that€obtains€a€certificate€of€registration€under€the€IndustrialÏLoan€›and€Thrift€Act€does€not€have€a€right€to€then€operate€perpetuallyœ.€€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€45„5„205(a)(2)€(1993)€empowers€the€Commissioner€of€FinancialÏInstitutions€to€revoke€a€certificate€of€registration€if€the€registrant€hasÏknowingly€and€without€exercising€due€care€ð ð[¢v]iolated£€any€provision€of€thisÏchapter€or€any€rule€or€regulation€issued€under€this€chapter.ððÌÌà àTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€€45„5„201(a)€and€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€45„5„205(a)(2)Ïare€part€of€the€same€statutory€scheme€and,€therefore,€should€be€construedÏtogether,€òòseeóó€òòIn€re€Gant,óó€937€S.W.2d€842,€845€(Tenn.€1996);€òòState€v.€¢Blouvett£,óóÏ904€S.W.2d€111,€113€(Tenn.€1995),€in€order€to€promote€consistency€andÏuniformity,€òòsee€State€ex€rel.€¢Witcher£€v.€¢Bilbrey£,óó€878€S.W.2d€567,€571€(Tenn.ÏCt.€App.€1994),€and€to€avoid€placing€statutes€in€conflict€with€each€other.€€òòSeeÏHolder€v.€Tennessee€Judicial€Selection€¢Commððn£,óó€937€S.W.2d€877,€883€(Tenn.Ï1996);€òò¢Cronin£€v.€Howe,óó€906€S.W.2d€910,€912€(Tenn.€1995).€€Since€Tenn.ÏCode€Ann.€ðð€45„5„205(a)(2)€empowers€the€Commissioner€to€revokeÏcertificates€of€registration€for€ð ðany€provision€of€this€chapter,ðð€theÏCommissioner€has€the€authority€to€revoke€the€certificate€of€any€registrant€thatÏdoes€not€satisfy€the€ð ðexperience,€character,€and€general€fitnessðð€requirement€inÏTenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€45„5„201(a)(1).€€Any€other€interpretation€wouldÏundermine€the€Departmentððs€ability€to€protect€the€public€and€would€render€theÏCommissionerððs€enforcement€authority€meaningless.€€›Accordingly,€the€trialÏcourt€erred€when€it€found€that€the€Department€could€not€use€Tenn.€Code€Ann.Ïðð€45„5„201(a)(1)€as€a€basis€to€revoke€the€certificates€of€registration€forÏNational€Loansðð€three€branch€offices€in€Tennessee.œÌÌà@ àò òIV.ó óÌà@ àòòò òEvidentiary€Support€for€the€Revocation€Orderó óóóÌÌà àThe€remaining€issue€is€whether€the€administrative€record€containsÏsubstantial€and€material€evidence€supporting€the€decision€to€revoke€theÏcertificates€of€registration€for€each€of€National€Loansðð€branch€offices€inÏTennessee.€€We€have€determined€that€the€trial€court€erred€by€reversing€theÏrevocation€of€the€Milan€branch€officeððs€certificate€of€registration€and€that€theÍrecord€contains€substantial€and€material€evidence€supporting€the€revocation€ofÏall€three€of€National€Loansðð€branch€offices€in€Tennessee.ÌÌà àOur€review€of€the€Commissionerððs€revocation€order€is€governed€by€theÏUniform€Administrative€Procedures€Act.€€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€4„5„322(h)(5)Ï(Supp.€1996)€directs€us€to€modify€or€reverse€a€final€order€if€it€is€ð ðunsupportedÏby€evidence€which€is€both€substantive€and€material€in€light€of€entire€record.ðð€ÏThis€standard€of€review€does€not€contemplate€that€we€will€¢reweigh£€theÏevidence,€òòMcClellan€v.€Board€of€Regents,óó€921€S.W.2d€684,€693€(Tenn.€1996),Ïor€that€we€will€substitute€our€judgment€concerning€the€weight€of€the€evidenceÏfor€the€administrative€agencyððs.€€òò¢Sanifill£€of€Tenn.,€Inc.,€v.€Tennessee€SolidÏWaste€Disposal€Control€Bd.,óó€907€S.W.2d€807,€810€(Tenn.€1995).€€It€does,Ïhowever,€require€us€to€review€the€record€to€determine€whether€the€agencyððsÏdecision€is€based€on€the€sort€of€relevant€evidence€that€a€reasonable€personÏmight€accept€to€support€a€rational€conclusion€or€to€furnish€a€reasonably€soundÏbasis€for€the€action€under€consideration.€€òòClay€County€Manor,€Inc.€v.€State,óóÏ849€S.W.2d€755,€759€(Tenn.€1993);€€òòSouthern€Ry.€Co.€v.€State€Bd.€ofÏEqualization,óó€682€S.W.2d€196,€199€(Tenn.€1984).ÌÌà àThe€record€contains€substantial€and€material€evidence€that€NationalÏLoans€had€a€company„wide€policy€to€charge€more€fees€for€real€estate€loansÏthan€permitted€by€the€Industrial€Loan€and€Thrift€Act€and€that€all€three€of€itsÏTennessee€branch€offices€collected€fees€in€violation€of€Tenn.€Code€Ann.€ðð€45„5„403(1)(B).€€The€administrative€law€judge€found€National€Loansðð€elaborateÏjustifications€for€its€conduct€not€worthy€of€belief.€€We€give€great€weight€toÏthis€determination,€2€Kenneth€C.€Davis€&€Richard€J.€Pierce,€Jr.,ÏòòAdministrative€Law€Treatiseóó€ðð€11.2,€at€183„84€(3d€ed.€1994);€2€Charles€H.ÏKoch,€òòAdministrative€Law€and€Practiceóó€ðð€9.16€at€204€(Supp.€1997),€becauseÍdetermining€the€credibility€of€witnesses€is€within€the€province€of€theÏadministrative€finder€of€fact.€€1€Charles€H.€Koch,€òòAdministrative€Law€andÏPracticeóó€ðð€¢6.54A£,€at€290€(Supp.€1997).€€Like€the€administrative€law€judge,€›theÏCommissioner,€and€the€trial€court,€we€place€little€credibility€in€NationalÏLoansðð€protestations€that€it€was€not€aware€of€the€fee€limitations€in€theÏIndustrial€Loan€and€Thrift€Actœ.× ƒ: ××  ×à àÌÌà àIn€a€similar€fashion,€the€record€contains€substantial€and€materialÏevidence€that€National€Loans€had€a€company„wide€policy€to€misappropriate€theÏproceeds€of›€joint€credit€life€insurance€policies€by€forging€endorsements€onÏchecks€payable€to€its€customersðð€estates.€€Two€of€National€Loansðð€branchÏoffices€in€Tennessee€engaged€in€this€practice.€€The€record€contains€no€evidenceÏthat€National€Loansðð€branch€office€in€Milan€did€not€follow€company€policy.€ÏDirect€evidence€of€the€Milan€branch€officeððs€conduct€was€unavailable€becauseÏthe€office€did€not€maintain€the€records€that€would€have€enabled€theÏDepartment€to€determine€whether€the€practice€tookœ€place.€€ÌÌà àThe€record€shows€by€clear€and€convincing€evidence€that€National€Loans,Ïas€€a€matter€of€corporate€policy,€knowingly€engaged€in€practices€that€wereÏneither€lawful€nor€fair.€€These€practices€were€not€isolated€mistakes,€but€ratherÏwere€carefully€calculated€to€enable€National€Loans€to€collect€more€fees€thanÏpermitted€by€the€Industrial€Loan€and€Thrift€Act.€€The€magnitude€of€NationalÏLoansðð€conduct€is€sufficient€to€undermine€the€publicððs€confidence€that€theÏcompany€was€operating€its€business€lawfully€and€fairly.€€Accordingly,€theÍDepartment€had€sufficient€factual€and€legal€grounds€to€revoke€the€certificatesÏof€registration€of€all€three€of€National€Loansðð€branch€offices€in€Tennessee.€ÌÌà@ àò òV.ó óÌÌ›à àWe€affirm€the€revocation€of€the€certificates€of€registration€of€NationalÏLoansðð€Jackson€and€Collierville€branch€offices.€€In€addition,€we€reverse€theÏtrial€courtððs€œreversal€of€the€administrative€revocation›€of€the€Milan€branchÏofficeððs€certificate€of€registration€and€remand€the€case€for€the€entry€of€anÏorder€affirming€the€revocation€of€the€certificate€of€registration€of€NationalÏLoansðð€Milan€office.€€We€also€tax€the€costs€of€this€appeal€to€National€Loans,ÏInc.€and€its€surety€for€which€execution,€if€necessary,€may€issue.€ÌÓÓœÌÌà àà àà àà àà àà àà à____________________________Ìà àà àà àà àà àà àà àWILLIAM€C.€KOCH,€JR.,ÏJUDGEÌÌCONCUR:ÌÌÌ________________________________ÌHENRY€F.€TODD,€P.J.,€M.S.€ÌÌÌ________________________________ÌSAMUEL€L.€LEWIS,€JUDGE€Ñ „ ÑÑ X ÑÑ7€>¾¼¼d¼¼d7Ñ