Agency Adjudication

Question 1

What are three types of agency adjudications?

Answer 1

1. Imposing a fine or other sanction (i.e., the person/enterprise has violated a regulatory rule)
2. Suspending or revoking a professional license (e.g., granting or denying someone a medical license)
3. Denying or suspending a benefit (e.g., unemployment or workers’ comp benefits)

Question 2

What is the procedure to determining whether a adjudicatory proceeding must follow rules set out in SAPA?

Answer 2

1. Is this a SAPA-defined adjudicatory hearing? (i.e., Is it an agency determination re: the legal rights, duties, or privileges of the named parties that the agency is required to make?)
2. Is this proceeding subject to SAPA? (Exclusions include dicimplinary proceedings against agency employees and traffic law hearings)

Question 3

What are the SAPA hearing requirements? What is unnecessary?

Answer 3

Adjudications must be conducted in accordance with SAPA procedures, BUT

Evidentiary rules do not need to be observed unless required by statute

Question 4

Because evidentiary rules generally do not need to be observed in agency adjudications, what three actions are permissible that would otherwise not be?

Answer 4

1. Hearing officer MAY RELY on hearsay evidence;
2. Evidence MAY be submitted in the form of copies or excerpts; AND
3. Official documents need NOT be authenticated

Question 5

What are the three main types of agency adjudication problems on the bar?

Answer 5

1. Agency failed to give reasonable notice
2. Presiding officer of the adjudication is biased
3. Hearing not properly conducted

Question 6

What is required by the agency to qualify as reasonable notice?

Answer 6

The agency must give all parties reasonable notice of the hearing, including:

1. A statement of the time, place, and nature of the hearing;
2. A statement of the legal authority and jurisdiction under which the hearing is being held;
3. Where possible, a reference to the particular sections of the statutes, and the rules involved; AND
4. A short and plain statement of the matters asserted (a short statement of the claim asserted)

Question 7

What are three common issues being tested when the fact pattern is: the presiding officer is biased?

Answer 7

Issue-spotting: Know…

1. If there is evidence of bias OR
2. If there is insufficient evidence of bias; AND
3. How to raise the objection of bias

Question 8

What are the three facts that show bias by the presiding officer in an adjudicatory proceeding?

Answer 8

Hearings must be presided over by an unbiased officer. An officer has some bias IF:

1. He has a personal or business relationship with one of the parties;
2. He has a personal interest in the matter being adjudicated (i.e., he stands to benefit from a particular outcome in the proceeding); OR
3. He pre-judges the case (e.g., the PO states how he thinks the case should be resolved before the hearing is over)

Question 9

Whar facts are insufficient to show bias in a presiding officer?

Answer 9

1. The presiding officer has ruled against you in a prior proceeding; OR
2. The PO presided over a prior proceeding involving a similar claim, a similar defense, or the same party.

Question 10

1. How do you raise the objection that the presiding officer is biased?
2. What happens after that?
3. What is the burden of proof?

Answer 10

1. If a party believes that the PO is biased, he must file an “affadavit of personal bias or disqualification of a presiding officer.”
2. The agency then determines the matter on the record, and its determination is subject to review at the end of the proceeding.
3. Rubuttable presumption that the PO is free from bias; the person alleging bias (1) has the burden of proof and also (2) must show that the outcome of the hearing was the result of the bias.

Question 11

What are three common issues that show that a hearing was improperly conducted?

Answer 11

1. Ex parte communications
2. Consideration of outside evidence
3. Proceedings or decision not on the record
4. Final decision

Question 12

What is the rule on ex parte communications in adjudicatory proceedings?

Answer 12

The hearing officer (the person in charge of finding facts) may not communicate directly or indirectly with any person, party, or representative in connection with an issue of fact UNLESS notice is given of an opportunity for all parties to participate.

Question 13

What is the rule on outside evidence in adjudicatory proceedings?

What are the two exceptions?

Answer 13

In general, the hearing officer may not rely on any information outside of the record.

BUT he may rely on such facts IF:

1. The facts may be judicially noticed (i.e., the facts are so well-known to be true that they cannot be disputed); OR
2. The facts are within the specialized knowledge (technical or scientific facts) of the agency.

(For all other outside info, Officer must give parties notice and an opportunity to dispute the fact or its materiality PRIOR TO adjudication.)

Question 14

What must be on the record w/r/t adjudicatory proceedings? (4 requirements)

Answer 14

The agency must make a complete record of the hearing, including:

1. Notices, pleadings, motions, and intermediate rulings;
2. The evidence presented;
3. A statement of matters officially noticed; AND
4. The final decision

Question 15

What is required of a final decision?

Answer 15

The final decision must:

1. Be in writing OR be stated in the record (i.e., the hearing transcript), AND
2. Include findings of facts and conclusions of law.