Who may close an administrative hearing, and on what findings about the parties' statements and evidence is that decision taken?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
In the practice file for this exercise we read the hearing record, the hearing presiding officer's opinion and the other papers sent to the administrative agency, the list of written opinions each party filed, and the attendance record for the hearing day, because the provision turns on whether statements and evidence were sufficient and on whether parties appeared or filed.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading treats three routes as held by the hearing presiding officer alone: close where statements and evidence are judged sufficient; close without a further chance where parties failed to attend or file a written opinion without just cause; and where parties could not for just cause, set a period of not less than the minimum the provision fixes, demand statements and evidence within it, and close only once it has passed.
Another reading stresses the point at which the provision leaves things open: it does not say what makes a reason 'just', so the file itself has to show why a party was absent or did not file, and the provision speaks only to closing the hearing, not to what the administrative agency must then decide with the papers the presiding officer sends it.
Your judgment
Where a party was absent from the hearing day, what in the file would show whether the absence was for just cause?
PRO SE does not make this decision or keep a case record on this public site.When to reconsider
We look at this again if the provision is amended to change the minimum period, to define just cause, or to add a duty on the administrative agency after receiving the hearing record, or if a decision defines when an absence counts as just cause.