§Subdivision 1.Filing of exceptions.
In all contested cases the decision of the officials of the agency who are to render the final decision shall not be made until the report of the administrative law judge as required by sections 14.48 to 14.56, has been made available to parties to the proceeding for at least ten days and an opportunity has been afforded to each party adversely affected to file exceptions and present argument to a majority of the officials who are to render the decision. This section does not apply to a contested case under which the report or order of the administrative law judge constitutes the final decision in the case.
§Subd. 2.Closure of record.
In all contested cases where officials of the agency render the final decision, the contested case record must close upon the filing of any exceptions to the report and presentation of argument under subdivision 1 or upon expiration of the deadline for doing so. The agency shall notify the parties and the presiding administrative law judge of the date when the hearing record closed. In all contested cases where the report or order of the administrative law judge constitutes the final decision in the case, the hearing record must close as ordered in writing by the presiding administrative law judge.
Notes of Decisions
Hymanson v. City of St. Paul, 329 N.W.2d 324 (Minn. 1983).
· cites it 6× “) In addition, Minn.Stat. § 14.61 provides: In all contested cases the decision of the officials of the agency who are to render the final decision shall not be made until the report of the hearing examiner as required by sections 14.”
Petition of N. States Power Co., 416 N.W.2d 719 (Minn. 1987).
· cites it 2× “1984); Minn.Stat. § 14.61 (1986). Moreover, in ratemaking, as contrasted to civil litigation, evidence in the hearing record consists mostly of economic facts and the opinions of experts who have analyzed those facts rather than reports of sensorily perceived phenomena.”
Freier v. Indep. Sch. Dist. No. 197, 356 N.W.2d 724 (Minn. Ct. App. 1984).
· cites it 2× “…(1982). Following the hearing examiner’s report, the appropriate state agency must then render its final decision. Minn.Stat. § 14.61 (1982).”
In Re Occupational License of Hutchinson, 440 N.W.2d 171 (Minn. Ct. App. 1989).
· cites it 2× “2 After the AU had issued his recommendation, the matter was heard by the Minnesota Racing Commission pursuant to Minn. Stat. § 14.61 (1988). The Commission heard arguments from the counsel for both parties, and then deliberated on the case in a closed session.”
In Re the Minnesota Pub. Utils. Comm'n's Initiation of Summary Investigation, 417 N.W.2d 274 (Minn. Ct. App. 1987).
· cites it 2× “Minn.Stat. § 14.61 (1986), cited by Northwestern Bell, is entitled “Agency Decision in Contested Case,” and provides: In all contested cases the decision of the officials of the agency who are to render the final decision shall not be made until * * * an opportunity has been…”
Yellowbird, Inc. v. MSP Express, Inc., 377 N.W.2d 490 (Minn. Ct. App. 1985).
· cites it 2× “” Minn.Stat. § 14.61 (1984). Again, the Board failed to follow statutory procedure, resulting in a “lack of basic fairness” in its decisionmaking process.”
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.