Discovery in Administrative Proceedings: Whose Right and Whose Right?

In administrative hearings in Florida, parties are allowed to do discovery, which basically means they can gather and exchange information to help their case. The actual laws and rules are a bit unclear, but in practice, parties usually have the same kind of discovery rights as they would in a regular court case. So, in a nutshell, parties can get the information they need to make their arguments in administrative hearings. The laws about how agencies handle discovery in administrative proceedings are a little outdated and don’t give very clear instructions. Some minor changes to the laws could make it clearer and more uniform. Right now, the only legal authority for discovery in these proceedings is in a specific part of the law. It hasn’t really been updated since 1974. Making some small changes could make things work better for everyone involved. F.A.C. Part II, Ch. 28-106, contains rules for discovery in administrative proceedings involving disputed facts. These rules give presiding officers the power to manage discovery, similar to how discovery works in civil cases. If a party needs to request discovery in a disputed fact proceeding, the case will likely be referred to DOAH, where an administrative law judge will issue an initial order outlining the process. The same rules for discovery apply in informal proceedings under F.A.C. Part III, Ch. 28-106. In simple terms, this section of the law says that the presiding officer in charge of a case can make orders to make sure that the discovery process runs smoothly. In cases where the facts are not being disputed, there aren’t set rules for how discovery (finding evidence) happens. In a specific case, the judge and the parties agreed to follow the regular rules for finding evidence in a court case. When it comes to legal proceedings, there are two types: formal and informal. Formal proceedings happen when there’s a dispute over important facts that need to be decided. Informal proceedings are more like meetings and don’t involve deciding disputed facts. The type of proceeding depends on whether there’s a disagreement over important facts. The process for challenging an agency’s action is like a casual meeting and involves notifying affected people, giving them a chance to submit evidence or a written statement, and then getting a written explanation if their objections are overruled. The rules made by the Administration Commission to follow this law allow for formal motions and extra evidence after the meeting. For cases where facts are in dispute, the rules for getting evidence are as broad as in regular court cases. But for cases without disputed facts, the rules might change to make getting evidence faster and more limited. This would match the goal of making these types of cases quick and focused. By using a certain legal section as a model, a new law could be made to create a consistent approach to these types of informal hearings.

Source: https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/discovery-in-administrative-proceedings-whose-right-and-whos-right/