Ohio Rev. Code » Chapter 119 - Ohio Revised Code | Ohio Laws
Ohio Revised Code

Ohio Rev. Code § 119.09 (2026)

Adjudication hearing

✓ current as of May 2026
Find cases: SyfertCases citing this section ORCcodes.ohio.gov (official) Justiaon Justia CornellLII Search CasesGoogle Scholar
Effective:
October 3, 2023
Latest Legislation:
House Bill 33 - 135th General Assembly
PDF:
Download Authenticated PDF
 

As used in this section "stenographic record" means a record provided by stenographic means or by the use of audio electronic recording devices, as the agency determines.

For the purpose of conducting any adjudication hearing required by sections 119.01 to 119.13 of the Revised Code, the agency may require the attendance of such witnesses and the production of such books, records, and papers as it desires, and it may take the depositions of witnesses residing within or without the state in the same manner as is prescribed by law for the taking of depositions in civil actions in the court of common pleas, and for that purpose the agency may, and upon the request of any party receiving notice of the hearing as required by section 119.07 of the Revised Code shall, issue a subpoena for any witness or a subpoena duces tecum to compel the production of any books, records, or papers, directed to the sheriff of the county where such witness resides or is found, which shall be served and returned in the same manner as a subpoena in a criminal case is served and returned. The sheriff shall be paid the same fees for services as are allowed in the court of common pleas in criminal cases. Witnesses shall be paid the fees and mileage provided for under section 119.094 of the Revised Code. Fees and mileage shall be paid from the fund in the state treasury for the use of the agency in the same manner as other expenses of the agency are paid.

An agency may postpone or continue any adjudication hearing upon the application of any party or upon its own motion.

In any case of disobedience or neglect of any subpoena served on any person or the refusal of any witness to testify to any matter regarding which the witness may lawfully be interrogated, the court of common pleas of any county where such disobedience, neglect, or refusal occurs or any judge thereof, on application by the agency shall compel obedience by attachment proceedings for contempt, as in the case of disobedience of the requirements of a subpoena issued from such court, or a refusal to testify therein.

At any adjudication hearing required by sections 119.01 to 119.13 of the Revised Code, the record of which may be the basis of an appeal to court, a stenographic record of the testimony and other evidence submitted shall be taken at the expense of the agency. Such record shall include all of the testimony and other evidence, and rulings on the admissibility thereof presented at the hearing. This paragraph does not require a stenographic record at every adjudication hearing. In any situation where an adjudication hearing is required by sections 119.01 to 119.13 of the Revised Code, if an adjudication order is made without a stenographic record of the hearing, the agency shall, on request of the party, afford a hearing or rehearing for the purpose of making such a record which may be the basis of an appeal to court. The rules of an agency may specify the situations in which a stenographic record will be made only on request of the party; otherwise such a record shall be made at every adjudication hearing from which an appeal to court might be taken.

The agency shall pass upon the admissibility of evidence, but a party may at the time make objection to the rulings of the agency thereon, and if the agency refuses to admit evidence, the party offering the same shall make a proffer thereof, and such proffer shall be made a part of the record of such hearing.

In any adjudication hearing required by sections 119.01 to 119.13 of the Revised Code, the agency may call any party to testify under oath as upon cross-examination.

The agency, or any one delegated by it to conduct an adjudication hearing, may administer oaths or affirmations.

In any adjudication hearing required by sections 119.01 to 119.13 of the Revised Code, the agency may appoint a referee or examiner to conduct the hearing. The referee or examiner shall have the same powers and authority in conducting the hearing as is granted to the agency. Such referee or examiner shall have been admitted to the practice of law in the state and be possessed of such additional qualifications as the agency requires. The referee or examiner shall submit to the agency a written report setting forth the referee's or examiner's findings of fact and conclusions of law and a recommendation of the action to be taken by the agency. A copy of such written report and recommendation of the referee or examiner shall within five days of the date it is submitted to the agency, be served upon the party or the party's attorney or other representative of record in accordance with section 119.05 of the Revised Code. The party may, within ten days of service of such written report and recommendation, file with the agency written objections to the report and recommendation, which objections shall be considered by the agency before approving, modifying, or disapproving the recommendation. The agency may grant extensions of time to the party within which to file such objections. No recommendation of the referee or examiner shall be approved, modified, or disapproved by the agency until after ten days after service of such report and recommendation. The agency may order additional testimony to be taken or permit the introduction of further documentary evidence. The recommendation of the referee or examiner may be approved, modified, or disapproved by the agency, and the order of the agency based on such report, recommendation, transcript of testimony and evidence, or objections of the parties, and additional testimony and evidence shall have the same effect as if such hearing had been conducted by the agency. No such recommendation shall be final until confirmed and approved by the agency as indicated by the order entered on its record of proceedings, and if the agency modifies or disapproves the recommendations of the referee or examiner it shall include in the record of its proceedings the reasons for such modification or disapproval.

After such order is entered on its journal, the agency shall, in accordance with section 119.05 of the Revised Code, serve the party affected thereby a certified copy of the order and a statement of the time and method by which an appeal may be perfected. A copy of such order shall be provided to the attorneys or other representatives of record representing the party.

Last updated September 7, 2023 at 11:40 AM

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 152 cases (18 in the last 5 years), 1955–2025 · leading case: Clayton v. Ohio Bd. of Nursing (Slip Opinion), 2016 Ohio 643 (Ohio 2016).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Clayton v. Ohio Bd. of Nursing (Slip Opinion), 2016 Ohio 643 (Ohio 2016). · cites it 75× “] Administrative procedure—Board of Nursing—Disciplinary proceedings— R.C. 119.09–Hearing examiner for the Board of Nursing has the discretion to limit or quash subpoenas requested during disciplinary proceedings.”
Hughes v. Ohio Dep't of Com., 114 Ohio St. 3d 47 (Ohio 2007). · cites it 27× “First, must an agency strictly comply with the requirements of R.C. 119.09 before the 15-day appeal period prescribed in R.”
Pryor v. Dir., Ohio Dept. of Job & Fam. Servs. (Slip Opinion), 2016 Ohio 2907 (Ohio 2016). · cites it 10× “2d 246 , paragraph one of the syllabus (an agency must “strictly comply” with the procedural requirements of R.C. 119.09 for serving the final order of adjudication upon the affected party before the appeal period can commence).”
Ohio State Bd. of Pharmacy v. Frantz, 555 N.E.2d 630 (Ohio 1990). · cites it 7× “Defendants-appellants first contend that R.C. 119.09 requires the State Board of Pharmacy to issue subpoenas for depositions of witnesses when a party to an adjudication hearing requests a deposition.”
Sun Refining & Mktg. Co. v. Brennan, 511 N.E.2d 112 (Ohio 1987). · cites it 10× “12 must fully comply with the procedural requirements of R.C. 119.09 before the fifteen-day appeal period begins to run.”
Karvo Cos., Inc. v. Dept. of Transp., 2019 Ohio 4556 (Ohio Ct. App. 2019). · cites it 11× “12(A), ODOT alternatively contends that the Director’s Order is not a final, appealable order and Summit County lacked subject-matter jurisdiction because the Director’s Order notifying Karvo to file an appeal in Franklin County did not strictly comply with the procedural…”
Lies v. Ohio Veterinary Med. Bd., 441 N.E.2d 584 (Ohio Ct. App. 1981). · cites it 5× “The principal issues in this appeal concern the scope of review required by law in respect of charges of gross incompetence brought against a veterinarian when the examiner’s report of the evidentiary hearing and his recommendations are reviewed and considered first by the board…”
Korn v. Ohio State Med. Bd., 573 N.E.2d 1100 (Ohio Ct. App. 1988). · cites it 6× “R.C. 119.09 provides that an agency may postpone or continue any adjudication hearing upon the application of any party or upon an agency’s own motion.”
Wehr v. Div. of Oil & Gas Resources Mgt., 2018 Ohio 5247 (Ohio Ct. App. 2018). · cites it 8× “In turn, R.C. 119.09 requires orders issuing from agency hearings to be served by certified mail, return receipt requested, upon the party affected thereby.”
Stancourt v. Worthington City Sch. Dist. Bd. of Educ., 841 N.E.2d 812 (Ohio Ct. App. 2005). · cites it 5× “3 However, in its decision filed October 31, 2003, the common pleas court also concluded that because the state board of education failed to fully comply with the procedural requirements of R.C. 119.09, the appeal period had not commenced and, as a consequence, appellants were…”
In Re Certificate of Need Application of Providence Hosp., 587 N.E.2d 326 (Ohio Ct. App. 1990). · cites it 15× “However, we find that the trial court’s decision interpreted R.C. 119.09. The trial court stated in its opinion that: “ * * * The Board’s authority to modify decisions of its hearing examiners is set forth in R.”
Bryant Health Care Ctr., Inc. v. Ohio Dept. of Job & Fam. Servs., 2014 Ohio 92 (Ohio Ct. App. 2014). · cites it 6× “13AP-263 9 {¶26} The record reflects that, on May 6, 2004, after the hearing examiner had issued its first report and recommendation, the Department entered an order directing the hearing examiner to take additional testimony as authorized by R.C. 119.09 and Ohio Adm.Code…”
Show all 152 citing cases →
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.