Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: philman_36; Harlan1196

Georgia Administrative Procedure Act (Title 50) applies to administrative hearings:

2006 Georgia Code - 50-13-15
50-13-15. In contested cases:

(1) Irrelevant, immaterial, or unduly repetitious evidence shall be excluded. The rules of evidence as applied in the trial of civil nonjury cases in the superior courts shall be followed. When necessary to ascertain facts not reasonably susceptible of proof under such rules, evidence not admissible thereunder may be admitted, except where precluded by statute, if it is of a type commonly relied upon by reasonably prudent men in the conduct of their affairs or if it consists of a report of medical, psychiatric, or psychological evaluation of a type routinely submitted to and relied upon by an agency in the normal course of its business. Agencies shall give effect to the rules of privilege recognized by law. Objections to evidentiary offers may be made and shall be noted in the record. Subject to these requirements, when a hearing will be expedited and the interest of the parties will not be prejudiced substantially, any part of the evidence may be received in written form;

(2) Documentary evidence may be received in the form of copies or excerpts if the original is not readily available. Upon request, parties shall be given an opportunity to compare the copy with the original or have it established as documentary evidence according to the rules of evidence applicable to the superior courts of this state;

(3) A party may conduct such cross-examination as shall be required for a full and true disclosure of the facts;

(4) Official notice may be taken of judicially cognizable facts. In addition, official notice may be taken of generally recognized technical or scientific facts within the agency´s specialized knowledge. Parties shall be notified either before or during the hearing, by reference in preliminary reports or otherwise, of the material noticed, including any staff memoranda or data, and they shall be afforded an opportunity to contest the material so noticed. The agency´s experience, technical competence, and specialized knowledge may be utilized in the evaluation of the evidence; and

(5) Any hearing which is required or permitted hereunder may be conducted by utilizing remote telephonic communications if the record reflects that all parties have consented to the conduct of the hearing by use of such communications and that such procedure will not jeopardize the rights of any party to the hearing.

http://law.justia.com/codes/georgia/2006/50/50-13.html


152 posted on 02/09/2012 3:04:20 PM PST by 4Zoltan
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 145 | View Replies ]


To: 4Zoltan
Hey spamObot, here's something for you need to heed.

"And more from Hatfield Foggyhead.

"A third significant flaw in Judge Malihi's "Decision" is that he completely failed to make a determination as to the proper placement of the burden of proof, and he failed to apply the burden of proof to his factual and legal conclusions. On January 19, 2012, Plaintiffs Swensson and Powell filed a "Motion For Determination of Placement of Burden of Proof" in which Plaintiffs sought an order of the Court, pursuant to Haynes v. Wells, 273 Ga. 106, 108-109, 538 S.E. 2d 430, 433 (2000), requiring Defendant Obama to affirmatively establish his eligibility for office. Not only did Judge Malihi not rule on Plaintiffs' motion in advance of trial, as was requested by Plaintiffs, but the judge never even addressed or resolved the motion in his final ruling. I do note, however, that the judge did indicate, in an in-chambers meeting at trial with all of the attorneys for the various Plaintiffs, that Defendant Obama probably carried the burden of proof in these proceedings.

The significance of the Court's failure to rule on the burden of proof is immediately apparent. The Defendant and his lawyer failed to attend trial and failed to offer any evidence, and such failures were intentional, as shown by defense counsel's letter of January 25, 2012."

155 posted on 02/09/2012 3:11:31 PM PST by Red Steel
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies ]

To: 4Zoltan

Poor you, you’re looking up stuff for the past while I’m looking up stuff for the future.


156 posted on 02/09/2012 3:13:16 PM PST by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies ]

To: 4Zoltan
Alas, poor bumbling you.

@Do you know the difference between a hearing and a trial?

You replied with...

@Georgia Administrative Procedure Act (Title 50) applies to administrative hearings: 2006 Georgia Code - 50-13-15

However, the diligent searcher finds this...

@2010 Georgia Code TITLE 50 - STATE GOVERNMENT CHAPTER 13 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE

@TITLE 50 - STATE GOVERNMENT

CHAPTER 13 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
ARTICLE 1 - GENERAL PROVISIONS

Sure enough, 50-13-15 is there...@§ 50-13-15

Yet there is a problem...for you.
ARTICLE 2 - OFFICE OF STATE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

@TITLE 50 - STATE GOVERNMENT

CHAPTER 13 - ADMINISTRATIVE PROCEDURE
ARTICLE 2 - OFFICE OF STATE ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

That is who held the hearings, right? § 50-13-40 - Office created; chief state administrative law judge
§ 50-13-41 - Hearing procedures; powers of administrative law judge; issuance of decision; review
§ 50-13-42 - Applicability of article
§ 50-13-43 - Agencies to cooperate with chief state administrative law judge; Office of State Administrative Hearings to comply with federal law; rules and regulations
§ 50-13-44 - Administrative transfer of individuals to Office of State Administrative Hearings; approval of chief state administrative law judge; funding of transferred positions; transferred employees status

163 posted on 02/09/2012 10:57:46 PM PST by philman_36 (Pride breakfasted with plenty, dined with poverty, and supped with infamy. Benjamin Franklin)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 152 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson