|
Search Keywords or type in your question (min 3 char.)
|
|
|
|
Attached Document:
hanks__05-13-98_memo__good_cause_.pdf
Documents : Burden of Proof
May 13, 1998 Memo to ALJs from Russell J. Hanks (Policy Guidelines: Good Cause)
|
This memorandum clarifies Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH) policy on the burden of proof in employment cases to ensure that it comports with regulatory and judicial requirements.
Deputy General Counsel for Administrative Hearings Russell J. Hanks states that
"Where the agency has determined to impose a sanction for failure to comply with work rules, the agency must produce evidence establishing the elements of the appellant's willful failure to cooperate without good cause or its determination cannot be affirmed. The agency's burden. however, is limited to coming forward with the basic components of a work rules violation, i.e., the failure to report, and the absence of any good cause reason presented by the appellant.
"Under 18 NYCRR ยง351.26, the applicant or recipient is responsible for notifying the local social services district of the reason for failing to comply with an eligibility requirement and for furnishing evidence to support any claim of good cause. The agency must review the information and evidence provided by the appellant, if any, and determine whether the information and evidence support a finding of good cause. Accordingly, individuals who contend they have good cause have the burden of demonstrating good cause. (See Sirota v. Hammons and Wing (Sup. Ct., New York County, April 21, 1997)."
But see General Information System (GIS) Message 05 TA/DC032 [available at: http://onlineresources.wnylc.net/pb/docs/gis_05_ta_dc032.pdf], which was issued in response to the decisions in Earl v Turner, 303 A.D.2d 282, 757 N.Y.S.2d 255 (1st Dept. 2003), lv. denied 100 N.Y.2d 506, 763 N.Y.S.2d 812, 795 N.E.2d 38 (2003) and Matter of Dost v Wing, 16 A.D.3d 497, 792 N.Y.S.2d 105 (2d Dept. 2005).
|
|
Created: 5/30/2008
Updated: 6/1/2008
|
|
