Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Hearing Procedure topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
DPH counsel outlines new pre‑hearing motion process: chair handles routine continuances, substantive motions go before panel
Summary
Assistant Attorney Liz Bannon told the commission that routine procedural motions (for example, scheduling/continuances) can be granted by the hearing panel chair, while motions requiring argument will be placed on a panel agenda so parties can present argument before a decision.
Assistant Attorney Liz Bannon of the Department of Public Health counsel’s office explained proposed clarifications to how pre‑hearing motions would be handled in DPH cases. She said routine procedural matters such as continuances can be granted by the panel chair, but motions that raise substantive legal issues (for example, a request for a more specific statement of charges) should be scheduled for argument before the full hearing panel.
Bannon told commissioners the change is intended to streamline purely procedural requests while preserving the parties’ right to be heard for motions that require evaluation of facts or legal argument: “Those motions that really warrant argument — our goal is to schedule them for argument before the panel so parties can make their positions and the panel can consider them,” she said.
Board members asked about factors the chair might consider when ruling on continuances (number of prior continuances, length of the requested continuance, objections from other parties), and counsel said those are appropriate considerations. Bannon and other counsel emphasized the intent was not to add hearings or burden the commission but to clarify roles and ensure parties receive a fair opportunity to be heard where warranted.
No change to existing case law or statute was announced; counsel characterized the proposal as an internal procedure to improve clarity in DPH hearings.
