The

Janet Napolitano
Governor

OAH

Cliff J. Vanell
Director

Vol. 33
October 2004
www.azoah.com

Official Newsletter of the Arizona Office of Administrative Hearings

Lights...Camera…Action…At Studio OAH
by Wendy S. Morton, Administrative Law Judge

The Office of Administrative Hearings
(“OAH”) is proud to announce the blockbuster hit
video “Preparing for Hearing”, a critically acclaimed,
star-studded…CUT!
Not to worry, “Hollywood” has not gone to
our heads.
At OAH, our mission has always been to
provide fair and impartial hearings to parties in an
atmosphere where everyone is treated with respect.
Now, with a little “Hollywood” and a touch of technology, we are even better able to help serve those
who appear before us. Unsure what to expect from
your administrative hearing? Log on to our website
(www.azoah.com) and access our new video,
“Preparing for Hearing.”
“Preparing for Hearing” introduces you to
real-life scenarios from administrative hearings.
“Ripped from the headlines” of our newsletter, you
will have an opportunity to hear the answers to the
Director’s note: OAH is committed to fairness and making hearings
accessible to all. This article is part of a series of informational articles to
educate the public and parties who appear before us about the hearing
process and how to better present their cases. The current article may be
found at OAH’s website at www.azoah.com along with all previous articles
published in the OAH Newsletter.

The Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) began operations on January 1, 1996.
Administrative Hearings previously provided by regulatory agencies (except those
specifically exempted) are now transferred to the OAH for independent proceedings. Our statutory mandate is to “ensure that the public receives fair and independent administrative hearings.”
The process of unifying the administrative hearings function in OAH-style agencies
began in 1945 with California. The current American states and cities, and Canadian

most commonly asked questions about appearing
at OAH. You will get a chance to experience what
an administrative hearing is like from the comfort of
your own home.
“Preparing for Hearing” is an in-house
production that was created using our local (and
often hidden) talents. We shot “on-location,”
without a set dresser or any special effects. The
scenes you will see take place in an actual OAH
hearing room, so you will have a chance to sit in
the seat you may sit in during your hearing. The
parties and Administrative Law Judges you will see
are not stunt doubles. They are the people that
you may actually meet at OAH; in some cases, you
may see the very judge you will appear before in
your case. While all Judges have different personalities, you will get a feel for what it is like to appear
before a Judge at hearing.
The video tracks the hearing process itself;
from your initial preparation (writing direct and
cross examination questions, and deciding what to
bring to your hearing) to what to expect on the day
“Lights, Camera, Action”
(continued page 2)

provinces, having adopted the model, with year of inception are: Alabama (1998);
Alaska (2004); Arizona (1996); California (1961); City of Chicago (1997); Colorado
(1976); Florida (1974); Georgia (1995); Iowa (1986); Kansas (1998); Louisiana (1996);
Maine (1992); Maryland (1990); Massachusetts (1974); Michigan (1996); Minnesota
(1976); Missouri (1965); New Jersey (1979); New York City (1979); North Carolina
(1986); North Dakota (1991); Oregon (1999); South Carolina (1994); South Dakota
(1994); Tennessee (1975); Texas (1991); Washington D.C. (1999); Washington (1981);
Wisconsin (1978); Wyoming (1987); and Province of Quebec ( ).

Mission Statement:
We will contribute to the quality of life in the State of Arizona by fairly and impartially hearing
the contested matters of our fellow citizens arising out of state regulation.

1st Quarter Statistics At A Glance
Acceptance Rate:
ALJ findings of fact and conclusions of law were accepted in
95.9% of all Administrative Law Judge Decisions acted upon by
the agencies.* ALJ Decisions, including orders, were accepted
without modification in 91.2% of all Administrative Law Judge
Decisions acted upon by the agencies. 64.8% of all agency
modification was of the order only (i.e. penalty assessed).
Appeals to Superior Court:
There were 20 appeals filed in Superior Court.
Rehearings:
The rehearing rate was 1.07%, defined as rehearings scheduled
(8) over hearings concluded (747).**
Completion Rate:
The completion rate was 94.4%, defined as cases completed
(2051) over new cases filed (2172).
Continuance:
The average length of a first time continuance based on a
sample of cases (first hearing setting and first continuance both
occurred in the 1st quarter) was 52.09 days. The frequency of
continuance, defined as the number of continuances granted
(257) over the total number of cases first scheduled (2127),
expressed as a percent, was 12.1%. The ratio of first settings
(2121) to continued settings on the calendar (196) was 1 to
.0924
Dispositions:
Hearings conducted: 54.6%; vacated prior to hearing: 43.9%;
hearings withdrawn by the agency: 1.5%.
Contrary Recommendations and Agency Response: 12.8%
of Administrative Law Judge Decisions were contrary to the
original agency action where the agency took a position.
Agency acceptance of contrary Administrative Law Judge
Decisions was 68.6%.
*1.85% of Administrative Law Judge Decisions were certified as final by
the OAH due to agency inaction or were rendered moot by settlement.
** Cases which were vacated or which settled on the day of hearing are
not included.

“Lights, Camera, Action”
(continued from page 1)

“Preparing for
Hearing” can be viewed in
its entirety (39:01 minutes)
or in 10 different individual
segments. They include
Direct Examination, Cross
Examination, Opening
Statements, Closing
Arguments, Exhibits,
Objections, The Record,
and Your Experience at
OAH. We had so much
fun “movie-making” that
we also created a humorous review in a separate
segment entitled “Don’t Do
What Denise Don’t Does”
(1:49).
For computer
viewing, various formats
(from broadband and
cable to DSL to dialup) are
available. You may also
obtain a free DVD of
“Preparing for Hearing” by
contacting the OAH.
Coming soon to our lobby,
“Preparing for Hearing” will
be played in an interactive
kiosk so that you can
select and review segments of interest as you
await the start of your
hearing.

of your hearing. Learn how to
present opening statements and
closing arguments by watching
“parties” demonstrate what to do
(and what not to do). Watch direct
and cross examinations and making objections “risk free” and see if
you can spot the most effective
and least effective techniques.

The OAH staff and Judges
enjoyed the creative process in
bringing “Preparing for Hearing” to
you. The process challenged us to
think about each important segment of the hearing, and to explain
and demonstrate each segment in
a simple and entertaining way so
that, by watching, parties can
become more informed and more
comfortable with the hearing

process. We want everyone who
appears before us to understand
what to expect and what will be
expected of them. We believe that
nothing ensures success like
preparation. We hope that “Preparing for Hearing” assists you and
that your hearing at OAH is a
pleasant experience.

“Just know your lines and don’t
bump into the furniture.”
- Spencer Tracy

Unsure about how to get a
piece of evidence admitted?
Observe the hearing process in a
simplified, step-by-step demonstration and learn what pitfalls to avoid
in your own hearing.

“Acting is the most minor of
gifts. After all, Shirley Temple
could do it when she was four.”
- Katherine Hepburn

page 2

Agency Response to Administrative Law Judge Decisions July 1, 2004 - September 30, 2004
800

675

700

Agency rejects the
Administrative Law Judge
Decision
2.52%

600

Administrative Law Judge
Decision certified as final upon
agency inaction
1.72%

Agency amends order only
4.64%

400

300

Agency amends findings of
fact/conclusions of law only
1.46%

200

100
35

11

19

Agency accepts without
modification
89.52%

1

13

Administrative Law
Judge Decision moot

Administrative Law
Judge Decision certified
as final upon agency
inaction

0
Agency accepts without Agency amends findings Agency amends order
modification
of fact/conclusions of law
only
only

Agency rejects the
Administrative Law
Judge Decision

Average Time Between Selected Events - Appealable Agency Actions v. Contested Cases*, July 1 September 30, 2004
60.00

51.82
50.00

51.36

40.00

Days

cases

500

Administrative Law Judge
Decision moot
0.13%

30.00

20.00
14.04
11.54

15.33

11.71

10.00
3.98

AAA
CC

*Note: Appealable Agency Actions are agency actions taken before an opportunity for a
hearing. A typical example would be the denial of a license. A party is entitled to a hearing
before the OAH before the action becomes final. Contested Cases involve actions yet to
be determined by an agency. An example would be proposed discipline on a professional
license with the possibility of suspension or revocation. Parties are entitled to a hearing
before the OAH prior to the agency acting.

1.38
0.00
Request for Hearing to Scheduling Scheduling to First Hearing Date

Conclusion of Hearing to ALJ
Decision

ALJ Decision to Agency Action

2,172 Cases Filed July 1, 2004 - September 30, 2004
1st Q

Accountancy
Acupuncture Board
Administration
Admin. Parking
Agriculture
Ag. Emply. Rel. Bd.
AHCCCS
Alternative Fuel
Appraisal
Arizona Trial Courts
Arizona Retirement Sys
Attorney General
Arizona Works
Athletic Board
Banking
Behavioral Health Ex.
Building/Fire Safety
Charter Schools
Chiropractic
Clean Elections
Community Colleges
Cosmetology

2
0
4
59
0
0
826
0
15
0
1
1
0
0
13
2
18
1
2
0
0
3

FY 2005

2
0
4
59
0
0
826
0
15
0
1
1
0
0
13
2
18
1
2
0
0
3

1st Q

Dental
Economic Security
Economic Security-CPS
Education
Environ. Quality
Fingerprinting
Funeral
Gaming
Health Services
Insurance
Land
Liquor
Lottery
Maricopa Cty. Housing
Medical Board
Medical Radiologic
Naturopathic
Nursing
Nursing Care Admin.
Occupation Therapy
Optometry
Osteopathic

5
0
52
1
32
113
0
3
115
18
3
12
0
0
2
0
0
21
3
0
1
0

page 3

FY 2005

5
0
52
1
32
113
0
3
115
18
3
12
0
0
2
0
0
21
3
0
1
0

1st Q FY 2005

Parks
Peace Ofc. Standards
Physical Therapy
Podiatry
Psychologist Examiners
Public Safety - CW
Public Safety - Trans
Public Safety - Adult CC
Pvt. Post. Ed.
Racing
Radiation Regulatory
Registrar of Contractors
Real Estate
Revenue
School - Deaf & Blind
Secretary of State
Structural Pest Control
Technical Registration
Veterinary Board
Water Qual. App. Bd.
Water Resources
Weights and Measures

0
7
0
0
0
0
5
2
0
0
0
522
41
32
0
6
0
0
0
1
2
32

0
7
0
0
0
0
5
2
0
0
0
522
41
32
0
6
0
0
0
1
2
32

Evaluations of OAH Services
Note: The four major groups of those who responded are: represented private party; unrepresented private party; counsel for a private party; and counsel for the agency. The evaluations
are filled out immediately after the hearing, and the evaluations are not disclosed to the ALJ
involved. They are used by management to improve the OAH process and do not affect the
decisions issued.

Unrepresented Responses 1st Quarter

All Responses 1st Quarter

250
200
150
100
50
0

400
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0

Excellent
Good
Average
Poor

Q

ue
st
Q ion
ue
1
st
Q ion
ue
2
st
Q ion
ue
3
st
Q ion
ue
4
st
Q ion
ue
5
st
Q ion
ue
6
st
Q ion
ue
7
st
Q ion
ue
8
st
io
n
9

Q
ue
st
i
Q on
ue
1
st
io
Q
n
ue
2
st
io
Q
n
ue
3
st
io
n
Q
ue
4
st
io
Q
n
ue
5
st
io
Q
n
ue
6
st
io
Q
n
ue
7
st
io
Q
n
ue
8
st
io
n
9

Excellent
Good
Average
Poor

Questions:

5. Effectiveness in dealing with the issues of the case

1. Attentiveness of ALJ

6. Sufficient space

2. Effectiveness in explaining the hearing process

7. Freedom from distractions

3. ALJ’s use of clear and neutral language

8. Questions responded to promptly and completely

4. Impartiality

9. Treated courteously

The OAH takes its statutory mandate to provide fair, impartial and independent hearings seriously. Although part of
the executive branch, together with its client agencies, the OAH maintains a conscious detachment from political
issues and the missions of the other agencies. Procedures, rulings, and case assignment are at all times kept free
of outside pressures to ensure that the parties can be assured that hearings are impartial and independent. The
following graph illustrates how we have been perceived by parties in regard to our core functon of impartiality.

P o s t H e a r in g E v a lu a t io n o f Im p a r t ia lit y F Y 1 9 9 7 - F Y 2 0 0 4
3 00 0

2 50 0

24 33

22 84

23 53
20 05

2 15 8

2 119

19 3 0

2 00 0
18 3 0
15 5 5

18 12

2 2 19

19 4 8

17 4 4

1 50 0

14 7 3

9 52

% E x c e lle n t o r
G o od

1 00 0
9 11

T o ta l R e s p o n s e s
50 0

9 6%

9 5%

95 %

94 %

97 %

95 %

97 %

9 6%

R e s p on s e s
E x c e lle n t o r
G o od

0
1 99 7

1 99 8

1 99 9

20 00

20 01

20 02

20 03

20 04

This publication is available in alternative formats. The OAH is an equal opportunity employer.