Policy of Pennsylvania Department of Education, Office of Chief Counsel, to Avoid Commingling of Functions in Administrative Proceedings



Similar documents
991. Creation of division of administrative law Applicability; exemptions; attorney fees; court costs

Nebraska Ethics Advisory Opinion for Lawyers No

12/3/2015. Thomas J. Farrell Farrell and Reisinger, LLC Pittsburgh

Model Code of Conduct for Judicial Employees in the State of Nevada

Lawyer Mobility in the Context of Corporate Law Departments

Ethical Considerations for Tribal Lawyers and Judges

DELAWARE STATE BAR ASSOCIATION COMMITTEE ON PROFESSIONAL ETHICS. Opinion No BACKGROUND

NEBRASKA ETHICS ADVISORY OPINION FOR LAWYERS No

California Judges Association OPINION NO. 56. (Issued: August 29, 2006)

CODE OF ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR DELAWARE PARALEGALS PREAMBLE

: : before this court (the Court Annexed Mediation Program ); and

KENTUCKY BAR ASSOCIATION Ethics Opinion KBA E-402 Issued: September 1997

JAMS Dispute Resolution Rules for Surety Bond Disputes

WHISTLEBLOWER LAW. Subtitle 3. Maryland Whistleblower Law in the Executive Branch of State Government.

Rule 82.1 Who May Appear as Counsel; Who May Appear Pro Se

CHAPTER 20. FLORIDA REGISTERED PARALEGAL PROGRAM PREAMBLE. The purpose of this chapter is to set forth a definition that must be met in order to

CHAPTER 20. FLORIDA REGISTERED PARALEGAL PROGRAM PREAMBLE RULE PURPOSE

Legal and Judicial Ethics for Criminal Practice in US Afghan Defense Lawyers Program Public Private Partnership for Justice Reform in Afghanistan

INDIANA PARALEGAL ASSOCIATION CODE OF ETHICS AND PROFESSIONAL RESPONSIBILITY AND RULES FOR ENFORCEMENT

Errors and Omissions Insurance. 1.0 Introduction and Definition

CODE OF CONDUCT FOR WORKERS' COMPENSATION BOARD MEMBERS. Maintaining the Integrity of the Workers' Compensation Board

PENNSYLVANIA SUNSHINE ACT 65 Pa.C.S.A This chapter shall be known and may be cited as the Sunshine Act.

Nebraska Ethics Advisory Opinion for Lawyers No. 92-2

Sharing Information and Due Process Arizona Problem Solving Courts Conference May 14, 2013

How To Get A Community Supervision Sentence In Texas

CHAPTER 4 ETHICAL ISSUES FOR THE LEGISLATIVE LAWYER

As used in this chapter, the following words shall, unless the context clearly requires otherwise, have the following

CHAPTER 49. PROSECUTING ATTORNEYS. CRIMINAL PROCEEDINGS IN SUPREME COURT Act 72 of The People of the State of Michigan enact:

Fiduciary Responsibility

OVERVIEW OF RULES PERTAINING TO TRANSACTIONS CODE OF VIRGINIA THE VIRGINIA STATE AND LOCAL GOVERNMENT CONFLICT OF INTERESTS ACT

*Rule 1.4(a) *Rule 1.16(a) *Rule 1.16(a)(2) *Rule 1.16(b) *Rule 3.3 *DR7-102(A)(4) *DR7-102(A)(6)

Comparison of Newly Adopted Utah Rules of Professional Conduct with ABA Model Rules UTAH

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE (Southwest) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) Plaintiff,

Complying with the FCPA- An Exploration of Ethical Issues Raised by Recent Cases Are the Professional Conduct Rules Any Different?

Ethical Constraints on Lawyers Serving as Pro Tem Limited Jurisdiction Judges

No EQUAL EMPLOYMENT OPPORTUNITY COMMISSION; MANESSTA BEVERLY, Plaintiff/Intervenor in District Court

SENATE BILL 1486 AN ACT

Oregon Code of Professional Responsibility

Criminal Justice Sector and Rule of Law Working Group

The Role of Defense Counsel in Ineffective Assistance of Counsel Claims

Maryland Association of Paralegals, Inc. Code of Ethics and Professional Responsibility

Arizona. Note: Current to March 19, 2015

13 LC ER. Senate Bill 202 By: Senators Unterman of the 45th, Mullis of the 53rd and Chance of the 16th A BILL TO BE ENTITLED AN ACT

to counsel was violated because of the conflict of interest that existed with his prior attorney

འ ག ག ད དཔ ན ཡ ངས བ བཅའ མས ལ ༢༠༠༦ ཅན མ

Guidelines for Guardians ad Litem for Children in Family Court

Case 1:11-cv LGS Document 151 Filed 06/08/15 Page 1 of 7 : : : : :

Matter of H.P. v. B.P. 1/22/2008 NYLJ 19, (col. 3)

Case 3:11-cv RCJ-WGC Document 96 Filed 12/18/14 Page 1 of 9 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

NC General Statutes - Chapter 84 Article 1 1

KANE COUNTY DRUG REHABILITATION COURT COURT RULES AND PROCEDURES

Please note that this Act can also be viewed online on the Illinois General Assembly website at

STATE OF MINNESOTA IN SUPREME COURT CX In re Adoption of the Plan for the Minnesota State Board of Legal Certification ORDER

Nebraska Ethics Advisory Opinion for Lawyers No. 93-2

Philadelphia Board of Ethics Advice of Counsel GC

SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE CIVIL MEDIATION PROGRAM GUIDELINES

HEARING EXAMINER RULES FOR WHISTLEBLOWER RETALIATION CASES

ARTICLE 36: KANE COUNTY DRUG REHABILITATION COURT RULES AND PROCEDURES

In The Court of Appeals Fifth District of Texas at Dallas. No CV

BEFORE THE DISCIPLINARY BOARD OF THE SUPREME COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

R. Scott Krause, Esq. Eccleston & Wolf, P.C. Hanover, Maryland

How To Find Out If A Student Has Violated The Honor Code

Comparison of Newly Adopted Arizona Rules of Professional Conduct with ABA Model Rules

IN THE COMMONWEALTH COURT OF PENNSYLVANIA

SUPERIOR COURT OF ARIZONA MARICOPA COUNTY CV /27/2011 HONORABLE DEAN M. FINK

FORMAL OPINION NO Government Lawyer Employment Negotiations

and IN THE COURT OF CRIMINAL APPEALS, AUSTIN, TEXAS

NC General Statutes - Chapter 93 1

STATUS OF MINORS AND CHILD SUPPORT Act 293 of The People of the State of Michigan enact:

COMBUSTION ENGINEERING 524(g) ASBESTOS PI TRUST ALTERNATIVE DISPUTE RESOLUTION (ADR) PROCEDURES

Application For Misdemeanor Court-Appointments

Advisory Committee on Professional Ethics. Appointed by the Supreme Court of New Jersey

Terms and Conditions for Tax Services

INTRODUCTION no later than Monday, March 17, 2008.

Reports or Connecticut Appellate Reports, the

How To Know If A Prosecutor Can Contact A Victim In A Criminal Case

CHAPTER 6: CRIMINAL PROCEDURE MICHIGAN COURT RULES OF 1985

RULES FOR LAWYER DISCIPLINARY ENFORCEMENT OF THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF LOUISIANA

IN THE COURT OF APPEALS OF THE STATE OF IDAHO. Docket No ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

CHAPTER 5 THE LEGAL PROFESSION

Mahoning County Criminal Local Rules of Court. Table of Contents. 2 Grand Jury 2. 3 Dismissals Appointment of Counsel... 4

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF TEXAS

VISUAL RESOURCES ASSOCATION FOUNDATION. A Delaware Nonstock, Nonprofit Corporation ARTICLE 1. OFFICES

SAN FRANCISCO ADMINISTRATIVE CODE CHAPTER 96: COORDINATION BETWEEN THE POLICE DEPARTMENT AND THE OFFICE OF CITIZEN COMPLAINTS

Article 3 - Administrative Services (Language taken from Caro Charter Chapter 7)

ORANGE COUNTY BAR ASSOCIATION. Formal Opinion (Collaborative Family Law)

XYZ Co. shall pay $200 per hour to each of Lawyer A and Lawyer B for additional time (including travel) spent beyond the initial eight hours.

PUBLISHED AS A PUBLIC SERVICE BY THE OFFICE OF DISCIPLINARY COUNSEL

SFS 2002:599 Group Proceedings Act Introductory provisions Group action Section 1 Group proceedings Section 2

Prosecuting Attorneys Council of Georgia Transition Into Prosecution Program

A. Accredited law school means a law school either provisionally or fully approved and accredited by the American Bar Association.

COURT PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE FOR EXPERTS

The Mortgage Brokerages and Mortgage Administrators Act

NEW YORK STATE COMMISSION ON JUDICIAL CONDUCT POLICY MANUAL

INTRODUCTION TO LEGAL AID AND RELATED ETHICAL ISSUES I N N S O F C O U R T P U P I L A G E G R O U P 3 P R E S E N T A T I O N

AMENDED AND RESTATED LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY AGREEMENT OF ICE TRADE VAULT, LLC A DELAWARE LIMITED LIABILITY COMPANY

HARRIS COUNTY JUSTICE OF THE PEACE COURTS. Local Rules

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF APPEALS OF WEST VIRGINIA January 2013 Term. No LAWYER DISCIPLINARY BOARD, Petitioner. JOHN P. SULLIVAN, Respondent

STATUTORY SHORT FORM POWER OF ATTORNEY FOR PROPERTY. Includes Amendments Required By Public Act Form Valid July 1, 2011

UNIFORM COLLABORATIVE LAW ACT S.B. 714: ANALYSIS AS ENACTED

Transcription:

COMMONWEALTH OF PENNSYLVANIA GOVERNOR S OFFICE OF GENERAL COUNSEL Policy of Pennsylvania Department of Education, Office of Chief Counsel, to Avoid Commingling of Functions in Administrative Proceedings Purpose: The purpose of this policy is to memorialize the standards and operating procedures established by the Pennsylvania Department of Education s Office of Chief Counsel ( OCC ) designed to ensure due process and avoid commingling of functions in administrative proceedings. Background: At times, OCC lawyers are called upon to perform adjudicatory functions in the course of their assigned duties or to advise the agency head or boards and committees associated with the Department in performing adjudicatory functions. For example, OCC lawyers may be appointed as administrative hearing officers pursuant to the General Rules of Administrative Practice and Procedure, 1 Pa. Code Part II ( 31.1 35.251) ( GRAPP ). In other situations, OCC lawyers may serve as counsel to the agency head in considering appeals or other matters brought before the agency head, or to boards and committees (e.g., the Private Licensed School Board and the Private Academic School Board), when such boards and committees hear matters brought before them. In other instances, OCC lawyers are called upon to act as prosecutors, representing the Department or constituent offices, bureaus and divisions in administrative litigation before the agency head or Department boards and committees. In some instances, OCC lawyers represent these staff in administrative appeals or other actions filed with the agency head. In either scenario, these OCC lawyers might find themselves representing the Department, or a subdivision of the Department, before board counsel or administrative hearing officers who are also OCC lawyers. Due process, which ensures a fair hearing before a fair tribunal, is a fundamental requirement in an administrative adjudication. When OCC lawyers are appointed Department of Education Office of Chief Counsel 333 Market Street 9th Floor Harrisburg, PA 17126 717.787.5500 Fax 717.783.0347 www.education.state.pa.us

as hearing officers, they are required to follow the requirements of GRAPP, which among other things, imposes the duty on the hearing officer to conduct a fair and impartial hearing. 1 Pa. Code 35.189. GRAPP also prohibits hearing officers from engaging in ex parte communications or performing any duties inconsistent with their duties as hearing officers. 1 Pa. Code 35.188. See also Pa. R.P.C. 1.2 (stating that a lawyer shall not, without the consent of the parties, represent anyone in connection with a matter in which the lawyer participated personally and substantially as a judge or other adjudicative officer) (emphasis added). As employees of the Commonwealth and as legal professionals, the staff of OCC is also bound by a number of state ethics laws and the Rules of Professional Conduct. However, because of the special nature of administrative proceedings, clear procedural safeguards by OCC are desirable. In order to safeguard due process and avoid the appearance of impropriety and the prohibited commingling of functions in these situations, OCC has created standards and operating procedures that serve as formal walls of division between those serving in an adjudicatory capacity (e.g., hearing officers, legal advisors to adjudicators, and board counsel) and those serving in a prosecutorial or representative capacity (e.g., advocates and counsel to bureaus, divisions, etc.). 1 Standards and Operating Procedures: OCC adheres to the following standards and operating procedures: Lawyers performing an adjudicatory function should exercise independence of action and judgment to protect the due process rights of parties involved and to achieve the most legally correct result in a case, maintaining decisional independence from Department personnel serving in a prosecutorial or representative capacity. If the roles of adjudicator and advocate in a given matter are both filled by OCC lawyers, then the adjudicator and advocate shall be assigned separate supervisors for that matter, to the extent that such supervision is required. In 1 Pennsylvania courts have held expressly that different attorneys working for the same agency may serve in an adjudicatory capacity and in a prosecutorial or representative capacity, provided that walls of division are maintained. See Adams Outdoor Advertising v. Department of Transp., 860 A.2d 600 (Pa. Cmwlth. Ct. 2004) (holding that the fact that both attorneys were employed by the same agency does not present the potential of bias or the appearance of nonobjectivity, where walls of division are maintained ). 2

cases where supervision is required but an OCC attorney is unable to provide supervision, an appropriate attorney will be identified by the Governor s Office of General Counsel to provide such supervision. The assignment of attorneys to adjudicative and advocate functions shall be memorialized in a written memorandum that is distributed to all staff members in OCC and, upon request, to the parties to the applicable proceeding. Supervising attorneys may provide consultation to adjudicators, but they may not seek to alter an adjudicator s decisions or substitute their judgment for that of the adjudicator. There shall be no ex parte communication regarding any aspect of an open administrative matter between the OCC lawyer performing the adjudicatory function and the OCC lawyer performing the representative function in that particular administrative matter. See 1 Pa. Code 35.188 (relating to restrictions on duties and activities). See also Pa. R.P.C. 3.5 (relating to impartiality and decorum of the tribunal). No OCC lawyer shall serve as counsel to an administrative board or committee during the same time period he or she is representing the Department in matters within the jurisdiction of that board or committee. OCC attorneys shall take care not to discuss at the OCC weekly staff meeting any matter that is currently, or is reasonably likely in the future to be, the subject of an administrative proceeding where the roles of adjudicator and advocate in a given matter may be both filled by OCC lawyers. OCC shall maintain separate physical files for the OCC adjudicator and the OCC advocate assigned to a particular matter. To the extent practicable, OCC s internal computer network shall also be configured to restrict the sharing of files by OCC staff members that are separated under this policy. To the extent practicable, separate OCC support staff shall be assigned to the OCC adjudicator and OCC advocate. An OCC attorney performing an adjudicatory function should not conduct or participate in deciding the outcome of any proceeding in which his or her 3

impartiality reasonably might be questioned because of the attorney s personal knowledge of the facts in a case or involvement in the investigative and/or prosecution stage of the same case. OCC attorneys performing an adjudicatory function should promptly disclose to the parties any prior personal knowledge of or involvement in the investigative and/or prosecution stages of the same case. If, despite all of the foregoing precautions, a case comes before a board for adjudication, and the current counsel to that board had involvement in the investigative and/or prosecution stage of the same case, he or she shall recuse with respect to that case and another lawyer shall be assigned to advise the board with regard to that particular case. OCC attorneys serving as hearing officer shall disqualify themselves from any proceeding in which their impartiality might reasonably be questioned because of their personal knowledge of the facts in a case or involvement in the investigative and/or prosecution stage of the same case. See 1 Pa Code 35.186 ( A Presiding Officer may withdraw from a proceeding when he deems himself disqualified. ). Any party to a proceeding may seek the disqualification of a hearing officer pursuant to GRAPP. The required procedure is for the party to file a motion pursuant to 1 Pa. Code 35.186, including affidavits alleging personal bias or other disqualification. An OCC attorney serving as an adjudicator shall not be disqualified from a proceeding if the adjudicator s impartiality is challenged solely on the basis that the adjudicator is employed by the Department or within OCC, provided that the walls of division prescribed by this policy have been and continue to be maintained. All OCC staff shall be regularly advised by the Chief Counsel concerning this policy and the importance of avoiding commingling of functions. Copies of this policy shall be posted on the OCC website. Any OCC attorney appointed as a hearing officer shall inform all parties of this policy promptly following the hearing officer s appointment. 4

To the extent practicable, the OCC website will identify any OCC attorneys who regularly serve as hearing officers. These standards shall be construed in such manner so as to avoid any conflict or appearance of conflict. To the extent that situations are not addressed in these standards, lawyers shall observe the spirit of the standards and take reasonable precautions to avoid conflicts and appearances of conflicts. OCC personnel who become aware of violations of this policy shall report such violations to the Governor s Office of General Counsel c/o the Executive Deputy General Counsel for Litigation. Policy Adopted: 4.28.04 Revised Policy Adopted: 12.23.13 5