Maine Revised Statutes

Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 5, § 9062 (2026)

Presiding officers

✓ current as of May 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ME-LEGlegislature.maine.gov JustiaTitle on Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

1. Presiding officer. An agency may authorize any agency member, employee or agent to act as presiding officer in any hearing.

[PL 1977, c. 551, §3 (NEW).]

2. Substitute officer. Whenever a presiding officer is disqualified or it becomes impracticable for the presiding officer to continue the hearing, another presiding officer may be assigned to continue with the hearing, except that, if it is shown substantial prejudice to any party will thereby result, the substitute officer shall commence the hearing anew.

[RR 2023, c. 2, Pt. B, §83 (COR).]

3. Presiding officer; duties. Subject to rules or limitations imposed by the agency, presiding officers may:

A. Administer oaths and affirmations; [PL 1977, c. 551, §3 (NEW).]

B. Rule on the admissibility of evidence; [PL 1977, c. 551, §3 (NEW).]

C. Regulate the course of the hearing, set the time and place for continued hearings, and fix the time for filing of evidence, briefs and other written submissions; and [PL 1977, c. 551, §3 (NEW).]

D. Take other action authorized by statute or agency rule consistent with this subchapter. [PL 1977, c. 551, §3 (NEW).]

[PL 1977, c. 551, §3 (NEW).]

4. Report. In the event that the presiding officer prepares any report or proposed findings for the agency, the report or findings shall be in writing. A copy of the report or findings shall be provided to each party and an opportunity shall be provided for response or exceptions to be filed by each party.

[PL 1977, c. 551, §3 (NEW).]

SECTION HISTORY

PL 1977, c. 551, §3 (NEW). RR 2023, c. 2, Pt. B, §83 (COR).

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 17 cases (4 in the last 5 years), 1982–2023 · leading case: Green v. Comm'r of the Dep't of Mental Health, Mental Retardation & Substance Abuse Servs., 2001 ME 86 (Me. 2001).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Green v. Comm'r of the Dep't of Mental Health, Mental Retardation & Substance Abuse Servs., 2001 ME 86 (Me. 2001). “5 M.R.S.A. § 9062(4) (1989). Furthermore, the Commissioner is permitted to “contract for the services of [a] hearing examiner or examiners, who shall conduct all adjudicatory proceedings pursuant to the Maine Administrative Procedure Act .”

New England Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Pub. Utils. Comm'n, 448 A.2d 272 (Me. 1982). “According to NET, the examiners’ report adopted many staff recommendations that Libby had advocated against NET in past rate proceedings. The Maine Administrative Procedure Act (M.”

Lane Constr. Corp. v. Town of Washington, 942 A.2d 1202 (Me. 2008). “The extensive Planning Board transcripts show that the chairman refereed an exhaustive, highly contentious Planning Board process that extended over a period of sixteen months.”

Baffer v. Dep't of Human Servs., 553 A.2d 659 (Me. 1989). · cites it 2× “” 5 M.R.S.A. § 9062(3) (1979). The Department’s hearing officer here states in his decision that his “jurisdiction was conferred by special appointment from the Commissioner, Department of Human Services.”

Greely v. Comm'r, Dep't of Human Servs., 748 A.2d 472 (Me. 2000). “See 5 M.R.S.A. § 9062(1) (1989). Absent a claim of actual bias, there is no basis for vacating the Department’s decision.”

Molasses Pond Lake Ass'n v. Soil & Water Conservation Comm'n, 534 A.2d 679 (Me. 1987). “§ 52 (1974); see 5 M.R.S.A. § 9062(1) (1979). Furthermore, as there is no evi *681 dence establishing that the Association’s property was rendered “substantially useless” by the Commission’s order, there has been no unconstitutional taking.”

Turner v. Apollonio, 441 A.2d 679 (Me. 1982). “5 M.R.S.A. § 9062(4) imposes the following requirements for reports of presiding officers: 4.”

Robitaille v. State, 468 A.2d 311 (Me. 1983). “5 M.R.S.A. § 9062(1) (1979). The hearing officer in the present case, served as a deputy of the Secretary of State.”

Palmer v. Maine State Bd. of Nursing (Me. Super. Ct 2019). · cites it 2× “" 5 M.R.S. § 9062(3)(C). A hearing officer's "expressions of impatience, dissatisfaction, annoyance, and even anger" do not constitute bias or prejudice.”

Narowetz v. State of Maine Bd. of Dental Practice (Me. Super. Ct 2020). · cites it 2× “On the contrary, the Board took the appropriate step of contracting with an experienced attorney to serve as the presiding officer for the adjudicatory hearing on June 14, 2019 .”

Witham v. Bd. of Trs. for the Maine Crim. Just. Academy (Me. Super. Ct 2021). · cites it 2× “) On January 21, 2020, the Board's Executive Director sent the hearing officer's recommended decision to the parties and informed the parties of their ability to submit comments on the recommended decision pursuant to 5 M.R.S. § 9062(2). (R. 606.) Mr. Witham submitted extensive…”

Aquafortis Assocs., LLC v. Maine Dep't of Env't Prot. (Me. Super. Ct 2018). “5 M.R.S. §§ 9062, 9063; Sevigny v. City of Biddeford, 344 A.”

Show all 17 citing cases →

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 5, § 9062(1) — 3 cases

Greely v. Comm'r, Dep't of Human Servs., 748 A.2d 472 (Me. 2000). “See 5 M.R.S.A. § 9062(1) (1989). Absent a claim of actual bias, there is no basis for vacating the Department’s decision.”

Molasses Pond Lake Ass'n v. Soil & Water Conservation Comm'n, 534 A.2d 679 (Me. 1987). “§ 52 (1974); see 5 M.R.S.A. § 9062(1) (1979). Furthermore, as there is no evi *681 dence establishing that the Association’s property was rendered “substantially useless” by the Commission’s order, there has been no unconstitutional taking.”

Robitaille v. State, 468 A.2d 311 (Me. 1983). “5 M.R.S.A. § 9062(1) (1979). The hearing officer in the present case, served as a deputy of the Secretary of State.”

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 5, § 9062(2) — 1 case

Witham v. Bd. of Trs. for the Maine Crim. Just. Academy (Me. Super. Ct 2021). “) On January 21, 2020, the Board's Executive Director sent the hearing officer's recommended decision to the parties and informed the parties of their ability to submit comments on the recommended decision pursuant to 5 M.R.S. § 9062(2). (R. 606.) Mr. Witham submitted extensive…”

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 5, § 9062(3) — 3 cases

Baffer v. Dep't of Human Servs., 553 A.2d 659 (Me. 1989). “” 5 M.R.S.A. § 9062(3) (1979). The Department’s hearing officer here states in his decision that his “jurisdiction was conferred by special appointment from the Commissioner, Department of Human Services.”

Narowetz v. State of Maine Bd. of Dental Practice (Me. Super. Ct 2020). “On the contrary, the Board took the appropriate step of contracting with an experienced attorney to serve as the presiding officer for the adjudicatory hearing on June 14, 2019 .”

Teer v. State of Bd. of Veterinary Med. (Me. Super. Ct 2020).

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 5, § 9062(3)(C) — 2 cases

Lane Constr. Corp. v. Town of Washington, 942 A.2d 1202 (Me. 2008). “The extensive Planning Board transcripts show that the chairman refereed an exhaustive, highly contentious Planning Board process that extended over a period of sixteen months.”

Palmer v. Maine State Bd. of Nursing (Me. Super. Ct 2019). “" 5 M.R.S. § 9062(3)(C). A hearing officer's "expressions of impatience, dissatisfaction, annoyance, and even anger" do not constitute bias or prejudice.”

— Me. Rev. Stat. tit. 5, § 9062(4) — 5 cases

Green v. Comm'r of the Dep't of Mental Health, Mental Retardation & Substance Abuse Servs., 2001 ME 86 (Me. 2001). “5 M.R.S.A. § 9062(4) (1989). Furthermore, the Commissioner is permitted to “contract for the services of [a] hearing examiner or examiners, who shall conduct all adjudicatory proceedings pursuant to the Maine Administrative Procedure Act .”

Baffer v. Dep't of Human Servs., 553 A.2d 659 (Me. 1989). “” 5 M.R.S.A. § 9062(3) (1979). The Department’s hearing officer here states in his decision that his “jurisdiction was conferred by special appointment from the Commissioner, Department of Human Services.”

Turner v. Apollonio, 441 A.2d 679 (Me. 1982). “5 M.R.S.A. § 9062(4) imposes the following requirements for reports of presiding officers: 4.”

Witham v. Bd. of Trs. for the Maine Crim. Just. Academy (Me. Super. Ct 2021). “) On January 21, 2020, the Board's Executive Director sent the hearing officer's recommended decision to the parties and informed the parties of their ability to submit comments on the recommended decision pursuant to 5 M.R.S. § 9062(2). (R. 606.) Mr. Witham submitted extensive…”

Evans v. Comm'r, Maine Dep't of Behavioral & Dev. Servs. (Me. Super. Ct 2003).

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.