New Jersey Administrative Code
Title 13 - LAW AND PUBLIC SAFETY
Chapter 69B - HEARINGS
Subchapter 2 - CONDUCT OF CONTESTED CASES
Section 13:69B-2.8 - Burden of proof

Universal Citation: NJ Admin Code 13:69B-2.8

Current through Register Vol. 56, No. 18, September 16, 2024

(a) The Division shall have the affirmative obligation to establish by a preponderance of the evidence violations of the Act or disqualification pursuant to 5:12-86.

(b) The Division shall have the affirmative obligation to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that a candidate for exclusion satisfies the criteria for exclusion set forth in 5:12-71 and 13:69G-1.3. In a hearing pursuant to 13:69G-1.8, the excluded person shall have the affirmative obligation to show cause why he or she should be removed from the list.

(c) Matters pertaining to candidates for preliminary exclusion shall be handled in accordance with 5:12-71, N.J.A.C. 13:69G-1.5A and 13:69B-4.1 and 4.2.

(d) An applicant or respondent shall have the affirmative obligation to establish by clear and convincing evidence affirmative qualification for licensure.

(e) An applicant or respondent shall have the affirmative obligation to establish by clear and convincing evidence rehabilitation in accordance with N.J.S.A. 5:12-91d.

(f) The Division, in a hearing seeking forfeiture, shall have the affirmative obligation to establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the respondent is a prohibited person as defined in 13:69G-3.1 and was engaged in a gaming transaction. Any winnings or other things of value resulting from a gaming transaction that are not claimed within six months of the date of the transaction shall be presumed to have been won by a prohibited person who has waived his or her right to a hearing. There shall be a rebuttable presumption that the winnings or things of value seized from the respondent were obtained from engaging in a gaming transaction and therefore subject to forfeiture. In order for the respondent to rebut this presumption the respondent shall have the affirmative obligation to prove by a preponderance of the evidence that the winnings or things of value, or any portion thereof, were not obtained from engaging in a gaming transaction.

Disclaimer: These regulations may not be the most recent version. New Jersey may have more current or accurate information. We make no warranties or guarantees about the accuracy, completeness, or adequacy of the information contained on this site or the information linked to on the state site. Please check official sources.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.