This memorandum was issued on July 19, 2911 by Daniel Bloodstein, an attorney in OTDA's Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH), to remind ALJs
"of the requirements concerning mailing issues that resulted from the settlement in the case of Meachem v. Wing. Recent circumstances indicate there may be a lack of clarity on the part of some hearing officers concerning how to proceed with proof of mailing issues, including the analysis of affidavits and supporting evidence presented by the Agency."
Attached to this memorandum were select pages (pp. 10-13) of the April 15, 2005 training materials on a "Meachem Overview." Under ยง D ["Evaluating the evidence"] (at p. 13), these training materials provided ALJs with the following instructions on the assessment of credibility at a Fair Hearing:
"Credibility calls are not just applicable to hearing appellants. Witnesses or written statements must also be examined for credibility. For example, agency representatives may make unclear assertions related to the (sic) their interactions with the appellant. Conflicting information may surface within agency documentation. In any instance in which the credibility of an account arises as a concern, the ALJ has the responsibility to develop the record sufficiently in order to make a well-reasoned judgment as to what are the supported facts of the case.
"After allowing the witness to provide her/his account, consider its believability and compare it to other independent evidence presented. Be a proactive fact finder. If something does not make sense to you, say so and seek clarification. If conflicting statements have been made or inconsistent accounts exist, actively seek an explanation from hearing participants. If a party says it needs additional time to provide the information you seek, afford that additional time to the party."
The complete Meachem training materials are available at: http://onlineresources.wnylc.net/FairHearingResources/docs/meachem_overview__04-15-05_.pdf.
|
