Agency Adjudication

Question 1

What is an AGENCY ADJUDICATION?

Answer 1

AGENCY ADJUDICATION =
An agency adjudication is an adversary contest between the agency and a person or enterprise.

In these adjudications, an agency official acts in a judicial capacity.

Question 2

What types of situations are covered by AGENCY ADJUDICATIONS?

Answer 2

Agency adjudications include the following:

1. IMPOSING a FINE or a SANCTION because the person or enterprise has violated a regulatory statute or rule;
2. SUSPENDING or REVOKING a LICENSE to engage in a PROFESSION such as a license to practice medicine, or denying a request for such a license;
3. DENYING or SUSPENDING a BENEFIT to a PERSON such as unemployment benefits or workman’s compensation benefits.

Question 3

What is a PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATION before an ADJUDICATION?

Answer 3

The agency must determine if the action is an AGENCY ADJUDICATION. IF SO, the agency must follow rules set out in SAPA (State Administrative Procedures Act).

Question 4

What is the DEFINITION of ADJUDICATORY PROCEEDING in SAPA?

Answer 4

An “adjudicatory proceeding,” is defined in SAPA as

“[1] any activity . . . in which a determination is made [by an agency] as to the legal right, duties, or privileges of named parties and
[2] the agency is required by law to make such determination only on a record and after an opportunity to be heard.”

Question 5

Which agencies are NOT subject to the rules of SAPA?

Answer 5

SAPA EXCLUDES certain proceeding from the definition of adjudicatory proceedings, including the following:

(a) disciplinary proceedings against agency employees; and
(b) hearings on traffic infractions.

Question 6

What are the SAPA hearing RQMTS?

Answer 6

Adjudications subject to SAPA must be conducted in
accordance with the procedures set out in SAPA.

Evidentiary rules NEED NOT be observed in agency adjudications (unless required otherwise by statute), the following actions are permissible. THEREFORE unless a statute states otherwise, SAPA allows the following:

1. The hearing officer MAY RELY ON HEARSAY EVIDENCE
2. Evidence may be submitted in the form of COPIES AND EXCERPTS
3. Official documents NEED NOT be authenticated

Question 7

What is REASONABLE NOTICE of an AGENCY ADJUDICATION?

Answer 7

The agency must give ALL PARTIES REASONABLE NOTICE of the hearing, including:

1. a statement of the TIME, PLACE, and NATURE of the meeting;
2. a statement of the LEGAL AUTHORITY and JRX under which the hearing is to be held;
3. where possible, a REFERENCE to the PARTICULAR SECTIONS of the STATUTES and the rules involved; AND
4. a SHORT and PLAIN STMT of the MATTERS ASSERTED

Question 8

How can it be shown and what is the process for claiming that THE PRESIDING OFFICER IS BIASED?

Answer 8

1. Evidence of Bias:
   Hearings must be conducted by an unbiased presiding
   officer.

These facts show bias:
(i) the presiding officer has a PERSONAL or BUSINESS RELATIONSHIP w/one of the PARTIES;

(ii) the presiding officer has a PERSONAL INTEREST in the MATTER being adjudicated ((i.e., he stands to benefit from a particular outcome in the proceeding); or
(iii) the presiding officer has PREJUDGED THE CASE (as for example, when the presiding officer states how he thinks the matter should be resolved before the hearing is over).

2. Insufficient Evidence of Bias:

These facts are not enough to show bias:
(i) the presiding officer RULED AGAINST YOU in a PRIOR PROCEEDING;

(ii) the presiding officer PRESIDED OVER a PRIOR proceeding involving a SIMILAR CLAIM, a SIMILAR DEFENSE, or the SAME PARTY in a different matter
- ———————————————————————————-
3. Raising the Objection:

(i) Affidavit Required. If a party believes that the presiding officer is biased, he should:
a. file an affidavit of personal bias or disqualification of the presiding officer,
b. the agency then determines the matter on the record and its determination is subject to judicial review at the END of the hearing (the objection preserves the ability to make a challenge after the hearing)

4. Burden of Proof:

There is a rebuttable presumption that the hearing officer is free from bias. The person alleging bias has the burden to come forward with facts that show bias. In addition, on
appeal, he must also prove that the administrative outcome was a result of the bias

Question 9

How can it be shown and what is the process for claiming that the HEARING WAS NOT PROPERLY CONDUCTED?

Answer 9

Proof That The Hearing Was Not Properly Conducted:

These following 4 matters show impropriety:

1. Ex Parte Communications:
   hearing officer (the person in charge of finding facts) may not communicate, directly or indirectly, with any person or party or that person’s representative, in connection with issues of fact UNLESS notice is given of an opportunity for all parties to communicate
   ———————————————————————————–
2. Consideration of Outside Evidence:
   hearing officer may not rely on information outside of the record.

However, the officer may rely of facts outside of the record that

(i) may be JUDICIALLY NOTICED (a fact that is notorious or well known); OR
(ii) are within the specialized knowledge (e.g. technical or scientific facts) of the agency.

3. Proceedings and/or Decision Not on the Record:
   The agency must make a complete record of the hearing, including:
   (i) any notices, pleadings, motions and intermediate rulings,
   (ii) and evidence presented,
   (iii) a statement of matters officially noticed - except for matters so obvious that no useful purpose would be
   solved; and
   (iv) a final decision.
   ———————————————————————————–
4. Final Decision:
   The final decision must:
   (i) be in writing OR stated in the record, and
   (ii) include a findings of fact and conclusions of law.