Posted: September 14th, 2017

administrative law

administrative law

a) You are an administrative law judge in a state Department of Alcohol Beverage Control. You review license cases, so you are in a specialized but pressured situation. You remember when you first got the job as administrative law judge and how happy you were.  You had worked in the agency, gotten a law degree at night, and were promoted the equivalent of two steps; you now make over 100K.  However, this has been a bad year for you.  While all administrative law judges get complaints about them from time to time, you are concerned about the nature of complaints at this point.  Complaints and allegations go to a special ethics review board in which cases are prepared by trained staff (who conduct the investigations where necessary), legal counsel sits in an advisory capacity in all ethics board meetings, and the board’s decisions are consistently in line with contemporary legal practice.  One complaint alleges that your decision to rescind a license was harsh, and did not fully take into account the circumstances that they felt were mitigating.  To prove harshness, the plaintiff has introduced evidence that you ruled against two other licensees who also had circumstances that they deemed exceptional and should have not had their licensees rescinded. A second complaint is from a clerk who you dated just prior to becoming an administrative law judge. You stopped seeing her prior to your appointment and have avoided her ever since.  She alleges sexual harassment by an “agency superior” but at the time you did not have a supervisory position. A third complaint is anonymous.  It alleges bribery; you have not seen the “evidence” and of course are disturbed, but also feel confident because you know that it is utterly false, and any evidence would be unsubstantiated allegations.  [In answering this overall question, do NOT consider the synergy of the three complaints, and assume that they will be handled independently of one another with no spillover effect.)          Q:  To what degree, if any, should you as the administrative law judge be concerned with these issues?

b) You are the Director of the Department of Corrections of a state agency. A new tough-on-crime law has sent the prison population soaring, while the state economy has recently plunged. You are warehousing prisoners in the gym, equipment rooms, and even hallways. There have been major riots in which prisoners and a guard were killed. You are one of a number of individuals named in a suit regarding Eighth Amendment violations of prisoners.    Q:  Do the plaintiffs potentially have a case? Should you be worried (personally) and what is the likely disposition?

c) You are a parttime city legal attorney for a small rural city. The new police chief is well-liked locally, but has no administrative training. His officers are all his friends, most of whom do not have training beyond the state minimum for a peace officer. There have already been three cases in which officers have either used excessive force or exceeded their right to search. In fact, it is rumored that the Chief has said that warrants for vehicle searches are not really necessary in small towns (despite a new Supreme Court ruling limiting vehicle searches) where “city lawyers” are far away.        Q:  In order to prevent the city from a major lawsuit, what issues would you bring to the Police Chief’s attention after being tasked by the City Council to “work with the Chief”?