Current through August 26, 2024
(1)
HEARING TIME AND LOCATION.
(a) A contested
case hearing shall be held at a time and location specified in the hearing
notice under s.
ATCP 1.20, or at a
time and location specified by the administrative law judge. In determining the
hearing time and location, the administrative law judge shall consider all of
the following:
1. The location and
convenience of the parties.
2. The
location and convenience of department personnel involved in the
proceeding.
3. The location and
convenience of witnesses involved in the proceeding.
4. Public interest and convenience in
attending the proceeding.
(b) The administrative law judge may adjourn,
recess or postpone a hearing as the administrative law judge deems
appropriate.
(c) A hearing, or any
portion of a hearing, may be held by telephone if the administrative law judge
determines that the telephone hearing is justified for the convenience of any
party or witness, and that no party is unfairly prejudiced by the telephone
hearing.
(d) The administrative law
judge may on his or her own motion, or on the motion of any party, hold a
hearing or any portion of a hearing by videoconferencing technology as defined
in s.
885.52(3),
Stats., if all of the following apply:
1. The
administrative law judge determines that the standards and criteria set forth
in ss.
885.54 and
885.56,
Stats., are met.
2. The department
or the party requesting the use of videoconferencing technology agrees to pay
the cost of using that technology.
(2) HEARINGS OPEN TO PUBLIC.
(a) Except as ordered by the administrative
law judge, every contested case hearing is open to attendance by the
public.
(b) Upon motion by any
party, the administrative law judge may do either of the following:
1. By order, prohibit the disclosure of
information or restrict attendance at any portion of a proceeding if the
administrative law judge determines that the order is necessary to prevent
disclosure of a trade secret or other information which is protected by law
from public disclosure.
2. By
order, exclude prospective witnesses from attending portions of a proceeding if
the administrative law judge determines that the order will promote the
interests of justice. Exclusionary orders shall conform to s.
906.15,
Stats.
(c) The
administrative law judge may, by order, prohibit any person from further
attendance at a proceeding if that person engages in disruptive behavior which
inhibits the orderly conduct of the proceeding.
(3) OPENING STATEMENTS AND CLOSING ARGUMENTS.
Opening statements and closing arguments are optional, and do not constitute
evidence. The administrative law judge may limit opening and closing arguments
as the administrative law judge deems necessary.
(4) ORDER OF HEARING.
(a) Except as provided under par. (b) or (c)
or other applicable law, the party requesting a contested case hearing has the
initial burden of going forward with proof at the hearing.
(b) If a party contests a division's legal
authority to issue an existing order, the administrative law judge may require
the division to go forward with proof that it had adequate legal authority to
issue the order.
(c) Subject to the
general order of proof under par. (a), the administrative law judge may
determine the order of proof in a contested case to promote an orderly
presentation and consideration of the case.
(5) EVIDENCE. The receipt of testimony and
other evidence in contested cases is subject to s.
227.45,
Stats. The administrative law judge shall admit evidence which has reasonable
probative value, but shall exclude evidence which is immaterial, irrelevant, or
unduly repetitious, or which lacks reasonable probative value.
(6) WITNESSES.
(a) All witness testimony shall be given
under oath or affirmation. The administrative law judge shall administer the
oath or affirmation to each witness.
(b) At the discretion of the administrative
law judge under sub. (1) (c) or (d), a witness may testify by telephone or
videoconferencing rather than in person.
(c) Cross-examination is not limited to
matters covered on direct examination. The administrative law judge may limit
cross-examination, as necessary, to avoid needless waste of time or undue
harrassment of witnesses.
(d)
Leading questions may not ordinarily be used in the direct examination of
witnesses, but may be used in the cross-examination of witnesses. A party may
use leading questions in the direct examination of either of the following:
1. An opposing party, or an employee or agent
of an opposing party.
2. A witness
who is hostile, unwilling, adverse or evasive, if the administrative law judge
permits the examining party to use leading questions in the examination of that
witness.