When an administrative appeal is not lawfully filed, who may correct the defect, and how must that correction be made and reach the other parties?
General information · Not legal advice
Material to check
In a practice file we read the committee's notice requiring correction, to see who issued it and what period it set, the corrected pleading the appellant filed with the copies attached to it, and any record showing the committee corrected a minor matter on its own initiative rather than by requiring it.
These are types of material to look for, not evidence already verified by PRO SE.
Where readings differ
One reading follows the allocation of roles in the provision: where the appeal is not lawful but the committee finds it can be corrected, the committee may, setting a period, require the appellant to correct it, and only minor matters may be corrected by the committee on its own initiative; the appellant then corrects in writing, submitting copies in the number of the other parties, and the committee must serve those copies on the other parties without delay.
Another reading stresses what the provision leaves undrawn: it does not say which defects are correctable at all, what makes a matter 'minor' enough for the committee to correct on its own initiative, or how long a correction period the committee may set, so the file has to show the defect the committee actually identified and the requirement it actually made.
Your judgment
Which defect in this file did the committee identify as correctable, and does the record show it required correction or corrected the matter on its own initiative?
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 define minor matters or correctable defects, or if a court decision on this provision explains how the committee's discretion to require correction is exercised.