NC General Statutes

N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-35 (2026)

No ex parte communication; exceptions

✓ current as of July 2026

Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section NCLEGncleg.gov (official) JustiaChapter 150B CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar

Unless required for disposition of an ex parte matter authorized by law, the administrative law judge assigned to a contested case may not communicate, directly or indirectly, in connection with any issue of fact, or question of law, with any person or party or his representative, except on notice and opportunity for all parties to participate. (1973, c. 1331, s. 1; 1985, c. 746, s. 1; 1987, c. 878, s. 11; 2011-398, s. 19.)

§ 150B-36: Repealed by Session Laws 2011-398, s. 20. For effective date and applicability, see editor's note.

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 5 cases, 1999–2008 · leading case: Mission Hospitals, Inc. v. N.C. Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 658 S.E.2d 277 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

Mission Hospitals, Inc. v. N.C. Dep't of Health & Human Servs., 658 S.E.2d 277 (N.C. Ct. App. 2008). · cites it 15× “§ 150B-35 states: Unless required for disposition of an ex parte matter authorized by law, neither the administrative law judge assigned to a contested case nor a member or employee of the agency making a final decision in the case may communicate, directly or indirectly, in…”

Miller v. Workforce Saf. & Ins., 2006 ND 1 (N.D. 2006). · cites it 2× “§ 12-8-13 (1998); N.C. Gen.Stat. § 150B-35 (2003). [¶ 36] North Dakota legislative history provides no assistance in interpreting what is meant by furnish, augment, diminish, or modify, nor do the comments of the drafters of the 1981 Model State Administrative Procedure Act.”

Miller v. Workforce Saf. & Ins., 2006 ND 1 (N.D. 2006). “§ 12-8-13 (1998); N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-35 (2003). [¶36] North Dakota legislative history provides no assistance in interpreting what is meant by furnish, augment, diminish, or modify, nor do the comments of the drafters of the 1981 Model State Administrative Procedure Act.”

Avant v. Sandhills Ctr. for Mental Health, Developmental Disabilities & Substance Abuse Servs., 513 S.E.2d 79 (1999). “See N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-35 (prohibiting ex parte communication between a member or employee of the agency making a final decision in a contested case and any party or his representative); N.”

Supermarket Express, L.L.C., t/a Lagoon v. Commonwealth of Virginia (Va. Ct. App. 2005). “Act § 307; N.C. Gen. Stat. § 150B-35; 75 Okl. St. § 313; Or.”

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.