The statute provides that “[a]ny party to proceedings under section 14.44, including the agency, may appeal an adverse decision of the Court of Appeals to the Supreme Court as in other civil cases.” Only someone who was a party to the preenforcement challenge proceeding before the court of appeals is entitled to seek further appellate review, since the statute speaks of an “appeal . . . as in other civil cases.” Although the statute could be read to provide or appeal as a matter of right to the supreme court, the appellate rules provide that “[r]eview of any decision of the Court of Appeals is discretionary with the Supreme Court.” or that the aggrieved party has only a right to petition the supreme court for further review. Presumably a petition for further review is intended.
The supreme court will make its own independent review of the agency’s record without particular deference to the decision of the court of appeals.
 Minn. Stat. § 14.45 (2014); Minn. League of Credit Unions v. Minn. Dep’t of Commerce, 486 N.W.2d 399 (Minn. 1992); In re Assessment Issued to Leisure Hills Health Care Ctr., 518 N.W.2d 71, 74 (Minn. Ct. App. 1994) (granting petition for further review of decision of court of appeals and stayed the appeal panel’s order pending a decision).
 Minn. R. Civ. App. P. 117, subd. 2.
 See Samuel L. Hanson, The Court of Appeals and Judicial Review of Agency Action, 10 Wm. Mitchell L. Rev. 645, 660-61 (1984); cf. Reserve Mining Co. v. Herbst, 256 N.W.2d 808, 824 (Minn. 1977).