Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1092.08

Final administrative decisions; review; exception

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section AZ-LEGazleg.gov (official) JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

A. The administrative law judge of the office shall issue a written decision within twenty days after the hearing is concluded. The written decision shall contain a concise explanation of the reasons supporting the decision, including the findings of fact and conclusions of law. The administrative law judge shall serve a copy of the decision on all parties to the contested case or appealable agency action.  On request of the agency, the office shall also transmit to the agency the record of the hearing as described in section 12-904, except as provided in section 41-1092.01, subsection F.

B. Within thirty days after the date the office sends a copy of the administrative law judge's decision to the head of the agency, executive director, board or commission, the head of the agency, executive director, board or commission may review the decision and accept, reject or modify it. If the head of the agency, executive director, board or commission declines to review the administrative law judge's decision, the agency shall serve a copy of the decision on all parties. If the head of the agency, executive director, board or commission rejects or modifies the decision, the agency head, executive director, board or commission must file with the office, except as provided in section 41-1092.01, subsection F, and serve on all parties a copy of the administrative law judge's decision with the rejection or modification and a written justification setting forth the reasons for the rejection or modification of each finding of fact or conclusion of law. If there is a rejection or modification of a conclusion of law, the written justification shall be sent to the president of the senate and the speaker of the house of representatives.

C. A board or commission whose members are appointed by the governor may review the decision of the agency head, as provided by law, and make the final administrative decision.

D. Except as otherwise provided in this subsection, if the head of the agency, the executive director or a board or commission does not accept, reject or modify the administrative law judge's decision within thirty days after the date the office sends a copy of the administrative law judge's decision to the head of the agency, executive director, board or commission, as evidenced by receipt of such action by the office by the thirtieth day, the office shall certify the administrative law judge's decision as the final administrative decision. If the board or commission meets monthly or less frequently, if the office sends the administrative law judge's decision at least thirty days before the next meeting of the board or commission and if the board or commission does not accept, reject or modify the administrative law judge's decision at the next meeting of the board or commission, as evidenced by receipt of such action by the office within five days after the meeting, the office shall certify the administrative law judge's decision as the final administrative decision.

E. For the purposes of subsections B and D of this section, a copy of the administrative law judge's decision is sent on personal delivery of the decision or five days after the decision is mailed to the head of the agency, executive director, board or commission.

F. The decision of the agency head is the final administrative decision unless one of the following applies:

1. The agency head, executive director, board or commission does not review the administrative law judge's decision pursuant to subsection B of this section or does not reject or modify the administrative law judge's decision as provided in subsection D of this section, in which case the administrative law judge's decision is the final administrative decision.

2. The decision of the agency head is subject to review pursuant to subsection C of this section.

3. The licensee accepts the administrative law judge's decision concerning the appeal of a licensing decision as final pursuant to subsection I of this section.

G. If a board or commission whose members are appointed by the governor makes the final administrative decision as an administrative law judge or on review of the decision of the agency head, the decision is not subject to review by the head of the agency.

H. A party may appeal a final administrative decision pursuant to title 12, chapter 7, article 6, except as provided in section 41-1092.09, subsection B and except that if a party has not requested a hearing on receipt of a notice of appealable agency action pursuant to section 41-1092.03, the appealable agency action is not subject to judicial review. The license is not stayed during the appeal unless the affected party that has appealed applies to the superior court for an order requiring a stay pending final disposition of the appeal as necessary to prevent an imminent and substantial endangerment to public health or the environment. The court shall determine the matter under the standards applicable for granting preliminary injunctions.

I. Except for a licensing decision concerning the administrative completeness of an application submitted by a licensee or a licensing decision where the agency, executive director, board or commission has determined that the licensee poses a threat of grave harm or danger to the public or has acted with complete disregard for the well-being of the public in engaging or in being allowed to engage in the licensee's regulated business activity, for any appealable agency action or contested case involving a licensing decision, the licensee may accept the decision not more than ten days after receiving the administrative law judge's written decision. If the licensee accepts the administrative law judge's written decision, the decision shall be certified as the final decision by the office. If the licensee does not accept the administrative law judge's written decision as the final decision in the matter, the head of the agency, executive director, board or commission may review the decision and accept, reject or modify the decision. If the head of the agency, executive director, board or commission intends to reject or modify the decision, the parties shall meet and confer, within thirty days after receiving the administrative law judge's decision pursuant to subsection A of this section, concerning the agency's proposed modifications to the findings of fact and conclusions of law. Within twenty days after conferring, the head of the agency, executive director, board or commission shall file its final decision in accordance with subsection B of this section. This subsection does not apply to any appealable agency actions of the department of water resources pursuant to title 45.

J. This section does not apply to the Arizona peace officer standards and training board established by section 41-1821.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 35 cases (6 in the last 5 years), 1999–2026 · leading case: Thomas horne/kathleen Winn v. Sheila Polk
Thomas horne/kathleen Winn v. Sheila Polk (2017) ariz · cites it 8× “” A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(0). ¶ 12 Ordinarily, nothing in the APA would necessitate having an agency head make both *230 an initial and final legal determination.”
Ritland v. Arizona State Board of Medical Examiners (2006) arizctapp · cites it 6× “AR.S. § 41-1092.08(A) (2004). The Board may review, accept, or modify the recommended decision.”
Wassef v. Arizona State Board of Dental Examiners ex rel. Hugunin (2017) arizctapp · cites it 4× “See A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(B) (authorizing the agency head, executive director, commission, or board to “review the [ALJ’s] decision and accept, reject or modify it”).”
Southwestern Paint & Varnish Co. v. Arizona Department of Environmental Quality (1999) ariz · cites it 4× “102, § 76, effective July 20, 1996; A.R.S. § 41-1092.08, amended by Laws 1997, Ch.”
J.L.F. v. Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (2004) arizctapp · cites it 4× “” A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(B) (2004). If the Director does modify it, she must provide “a written justification setting forth the reasons for the rejection or modification.”
Simms v. Simms (2025) arizctapp · cites it 10× “A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(A). If an agency rejects or modifies that decision, it will provide “a written justification setting forth the reasons for” doing so.”
Stapert v. Arizona Board of Psychologist Examiners (2005) arizctapp · cites it 2× “08(H) (2004) provides that a party may appeal a final administrative decision pursuant to § 12-901 et seq. “except as provided in [§ 41-1092.”
Smith v. Arizona Long Term Care System (2004) arizctapp · cites it 2× “Defendant is correct that the superior court should have determined whether the Director’s decision was supported by substantial evidence, not whether the ALJ’s decision was supported by substantial evidence.”
Pima County Human Rights Committee v. Arizona Department of Health Services (2013) arizctapp · cites it 4× “05(A); (2) the ALJ has twenty days after the hearing to issue its decision, A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(A); (3) the agency has thirty additional days to review and accept, reject or modify the ALJ’s decision and issue a final administrative decision, § 41-1092.”
Arizona Cannabis Nurses Ass'n v. Arizona Department of Health Services (2017) arizctapp · cites it 2× “The ALJ presided over a several-day evidentiary hearing, where AZCNA presented evidence largely addressing whether marijuana use was palliative but not whether it was therapeutic. The ALJ’s June 2014 recommended decision found that “[t]he preponderance of the evidence shows that…”
Natasha S. v. Dep't of Child Safety (2019) arizctapp · cites it 4× “See A.R.S. § 41-1092.08 ; 12-901 to -914. 2 ¶3 In December 2017, R.”
Callen v. Rogers (2007) arizctapp · cites it 2× “Under A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(B) (2003), "the head of the agency, executive director, board or commission may review the [ALJ’s] decision and accept, reject or modify it.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1092.08(0) — 1 case
Thomas horne/kathleen Winn v. Sheila Polk (2017) ariz “” A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(0). ¶ 12 Ordinarily, nothing in the APA would necessitate having an agency head make both *230 an initial and final legal determination.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1092.08(13) — 1 case
Stapert v. Arizona Board of Psychologist Examiners (2005) arizctapp “08(H) (2004) provides that a party may appeal a final administrative decision pursuant to § 12-901 et seq. “except as provided in [§ 41-1092.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1092.08(A) — 10 cases
Ritland v. Arizona State Board of Medical Examiners (2006) arizctapp “AR.S. § 41-1092.08(A) (2004). The Board may review, accept, or modify the recommended decision.”
Arizona Cannabis Nurses Ass'n v. Arizona Department of Health Services (2017) arizctapp “The ALJ presided over a several-day evidentiary hearing, where AZCNA presented evidence largely addressing whether marijuana use was palliative but not whether it was therapeutic. The ALJ’s June 2014 recommended decision found that “[t]he preponderance of the evidence shows that…”
Simms v. Simms (2025) arizctapp “A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(A). If an agency rejects or modifies that decision, it will provide “a written justification setting forth the reasons for” doing so.”
Pima County Human Rights Committee v. Arizona Department of Health Services (2013) arizctapp “05(A); (2) the ALJ has twenty days after the hearing to issue its decision, A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(A); (3) the agency has thirty additional days to review and accept, reject or modify the ALJ’s decision and issue a final administrative decision, § 41-1092.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1092.08(B) — 22 cases
Wassef v. Arizona State Board of Dental Examiners ex rel. Hugunin (2017) arizctapp “See A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(B) (authorizing the agency head, executive director, commission, or board to “review the [ALJ’s] decision and accept, reject or modify it”).”
Ritland v. Arizona State Board of Medical Examiners (2006) arizctapp “AR.S. § 41-1092.08(A) (2004). The Board may review, accept, or modify the recommended decision.”
Thomas horne/kathleen Winn v. Sheila Polk (2017) ariz “” A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(0). ¶ 12 Ordinarily, nothing in the APA would necessitate having an agency head make both *230 an initial and final legal determination.”
J.L.F. v. Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (2004) arizctapp “” A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(B) (2004). If the Director does modify it, she must provide “a written justification setting forth the reasons for the rejection or modification.”
Smith v. Arizona Long Term Care System (2004) arizctapp “Defendant is correct that the superior court should have determined whether the Director’s decision was supported by substantial evidence, not whether the ALJ’s decision was supported by substantial evidence.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1092.08(C) — 1 case
Simms v. Simms (2022) arizctapp
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1092.08(D) — 2 cases
Thomas horne/kathleen Winn v. Sheila Polk (2017) ariz “” A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(0). ¶ 12 Ordinarily, nothing in the APA would necessitate having an agency head make both *230 an initial and final legal determination.”
Facilitec, Inc. v. Hibbs (2002) arizctapp
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1092.08(F) — 1 case
J.L.F. v. Arizona Health Care Cost Containment System (2004) arizctapp “” A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(B) (2004). If the Director does modify it, she must provide “a written justification setting forth the reasons for the rejection or modification.”
— Ariz. Rev. Stat. § 41-1092.08(H) — 8 cases
Simms v. Simms (2025) arizctapp “A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(A). If an agency rejects or modifies that decision, it will provide “a written justification setting forth the reasons for” doing so.”
Stapert v. Arizona Board of Psychologist Examiners (2005) arizctapp “08(H) (2004) provides that a party may appeal a final administrative decision pursuant to § 12-901 et seq. “except as provided in [§ 41-1092.”
Natasha S. v. Dep't of Child Safety (2019) arizctapp “See A.R.S. § 41-1092.08 ; 12-901 to -914. 2 ¶3 In December 2017, R.”
Pima County Human Rights Committee v. Arizona Department of Health Services (2013) arizctapp “05(A); (2) the ALJ has twenty days after the hearing to issue its decision, A.R.S. § 41-1092.08(A); (3) the agency has thirty additional days to review and accept, reject or modify the ALJ’s decision and issue a final administrative decision, § 41-1092.”
Simms v. Simms (2022) arizctapp
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.