right to file a dissenting opinion. 1 . The revocation has been stayed throughout the proceedings. 2 . The DMV contends that it was prejudiced because of language in the circuit court's order that held, it responsible for the delay. Although the circuit court's order does in fact refer to DMV and OAH as a single entity in causing the delay, we find this to be harmless verbiage. In fact, the circuit court, in an amended order, clarified that it was aware that DMV and OAH were separate entities. In that amended order, the circuit court made clear that its findings regarding the prejudice caused to Mr. Staffileno remained. It should be pointed out that, prior to 2010, the administrative hearing process was under the control of DMV. See W. Va. Code § 17C-5C-5(a) (Repl. Vol. 2013) (2010) (<HOLDING>). In 2010, "[t]he Office of Administrative
recognizing the transition of the administrative hearing process from the division of motor vehicles to the office of administrative hearings recognizing that administrative agencies routinely apply equitable estoppel in administrative hearings and that permitting them to do so is consistent with administrative remedy exhaustion requirements and separation of powers holding that reconsideration of the correctness of property division was barred on appeal from the judgment enforcing that division holding that the discovery of evidence of crimes in the course of an otherwise proper administrative inspection does not render that search illegal or the administrative scheme suspect holding premature a suit filed before final administrative determination of claimants administrative claim