You are here: / / Right to Cross-Examine Witnesses in Quasi-Judicial Administrative Hear...

Right to Cross-Examine Witnesses in Quasi-Judicial Administrative Hearing

The Third Department held that a reversal of the NYS Office of Victim Services determination was required because the respondent Office heard the testimony of two witnesses in the absence of the petitioner, thereby depriving her of her right to cross-examine witnesses, a right which applies to a quasi-judicial administrative hearing.  Matter of Barber vs NYS Office of Victim Services, 513256 Third Dept. 2-14-13

 

 

You might also like
BECAUSE A MATERIAL INDUCEMENT TO DEFENDANT’S GUILTY PLEA WAS NULLIFIED THE PLEA MUST BE VACATED (THIRD DEPT).
PESTICIDE COMPANY WAS ENTITLED TO A HEARING BEFORE IMPLEMENTATION OF A CLEAN-UP PLAN BY THE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL CONSERVATION.
PETITIONER CARE FACILITY WAS ENTITLED TO THE UNDERLYING DATA USED BY THE OFFICE FOR PEOPLE WITH DEVELOPMENTAL DISABILITIES TO CALCULATE MEDICAID REIMBURSEMENT RATES; MATTER REMITTED FOR RECALCULATION WITH AN EXPLANATION OF THE FACTORS CONSIDERED (THIRD DEPT). ​
ALTHOUGH THERE WAS EVIDENCE CLAIMANT MADE A FALSE STATEMENT ABOUT THE LEVEL OF HER INVOLVEMENT IN AN ONLINE BUSINESS WHILE SHE WAS RECEIVING WORKERS’ COMPENSATION BENEFITS, SHE WAS FORTHRIGHT ABOUT HER INVOLVEMENT WHEN QUESTIONED; PERMANENT DISQUALIFICATION FROM FUTURE BENEFITS WAS NOT WARRANTED (THIRD DEPT).
DESPITE THE DRIVER’S FAILURE TO USE A TURN SIGNAL AS THE JUSTIFICATION FOR THE TRAFFIC STOP, DEFENDANT WAS ENTITLED TO A HEARING ON HIS MOTION TO VACATE HIS CONVICTION ON THE GROUND THE STOP WAS ACTUALLY BASED UPON RACIAL PROFILING; IN THE FIRST DEPARTMENT THE “TURN SIGNAL” GROUND FOR THE STOP WOULD BE ENOUGH, EVEN IF THE STOP WAS ACTUALLY MOTIVATED BY DISCRIMINATION; NOT SO IN THE THIRD DEPARTMENT (THIRD DEPT).
Question of Fact Re: Duty Owed to Developmentally Disabled Plaintiff for Injury Incurred After Plaintiff Left Facility for a Bus Ride Home
Stepmother Had Right to Portion of Children’s Trust Under Spouse’s Right of Election
SORA RISK LEVEL ASSESSMENT REVERSED, DEFENDANT WAS NOT GIVEN A MEANINGFUL OPPORTUNITY TO RESPOND TO COURT’S ASSESSMENT FOR VIOLENCE.

Categories

Sign Up for the Mailing List to Be Notified When the Site Is Updated.

  • This field is for validation purposes and should be left unchanged.

Copyright © 2026 New York Appellate Digest, Inc.
Site by CurlyHost | Privacy Policy

Workers’ Compensation Board’s Determination of Duration of Disability Given... Relation Back Doctrine Applied to Causes of Action Otherwise Time-Barred