Week 2 – 5 June

Introduction

Chapter 3 introduces the structure for adjudications and the ALJ system, as well as the informal adjudications that make up most agency adjudications. We are learning the background for adjudications in Chapter 3. In the Wooley Case, we look at the special issues posed by ALJ adjudications under Louisiana law. We will then look more deeply at adjudications in Chapter 4, which looks at the APA and Constitutional due process requirements for agency adjudications. We will revisit these when we read Chapters 6 & 7 on judicial review. The pace is fast – by the end of week 2, we will be at the same place as at the end of a month of the regular term.

APA Resources for general reference:

Federal APA – Administrative Procedure Act (5 U.S.C. Subchapter II)

Louisiana APA – DAL Laws and Rules

Part 1

Read Chapter 3 to III. THE APA PROCEDURES FOR ADJUDICATION, p. 84.

Review the APA sections discussed in this chapter: APA 554 – APA 556 – APA 557

Video – Chapter 3 – Introduction to Adjudications

PowerPoint – Chapter 3 – Introduction to Adjudications

Finish reading Chapter 3.

Video – Agency Adjudications v. Article III Trials

PowerPoint – Agency Adjudications v. Article III Trials

Video – Chapter 3: The APA Procedures for Adjudications – Part 1

PowerPoint – Chapter 3: The APA Procedures for Adjudications – Part 1

Video – Chapter 3: The APA Procedures for Adjudications – Part 2

PowerPoint – Chapter 3: The APA Procedures for Adjudications – Part 2

Part 2

We are going to take a deep dive into Louisiana’s separation of powers and adjudications because Louisiana has a unique approach to the relationship between ALJs and the agency. The Wooley opinion can be confusing because the first part of the opinion, through paragraph 47, lays out the lower court’s ruling. This is because the lower court’s original order is not well organized. I have annotated the case to help you sort out the issues. It is rich in Louisiana’s special flavor of adlaw.

Wooley v. State Farm Fire and Cas. Ins. Co., 893 So.2d 746 (La. 2005) – annotated (best viewed in Word outline mode)

Video – ALJs in the States and the Special Case of Louisiana: Agency Based ALJs versus Central Panel ALJs 

PowerPoint – ALJs in the States and the Special Case of Louisiana: Agency Based ALJs versus Central Panel ALJs

Video – Insurance Regulation and the Louisiana Insurance Commissioner

PowerPoint – Insurance Regulation and the Louisiana Insurance Commissioner

Video – The Wooly Case: How the Court Avoided the Separation of Powers Problem

PowerPoint – The Wooly Case: How the Court Avoided the Separation of Powers Problem

This is where we see how the Wooley saga played out and where this leaves adjudications in Louisiana.

Bonvillian Cases: Bonvillian v. Dep’t of Insurance, 906 So.2d 596 (La.App. Cir.1 2005) and after remand and appeal – Bonvillian, round II.

Video – After Wooley: The Bonvillian Cases

PowerPoint – After Wooley: The Bonvillian Cases

Resources for LA Adlaw

Practice materials for summary proceedings in Louisiana

I am providing these materials for those of you interested in the procedural aspects of filing declaratory judgments in Louisiana. These are not exam or quiz materials.

Part 3

Chapter 4 to: 1. Modern Concept of ‘‘Property’’

Read Goldberg v. Kelly Pay particular attention to Justice Black’s dissent.

Resources for Goldberg

TANF – State of Louisiana Information Page

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program – State of Lousiana Information Page

Video – Setting the Stage for Administrative Law Due Process

PowerPoint – Setting the Stage for Administrative Law Due Process

Video – Goldberg v. Kelly: Due Process and the New Property 

PowerPoint – Goldberg v. Kelly: Due Process and the New Property

Read Chapter 4 to B The Modern Rule (p. 123)

Paul v. Davis list of shoplifters

The list that was at issue in the Paul v. Davis case discussed in the book.

Read the van Heerden Case

Heerden v. Bd. of Sup’rs of Louisiana State Univ. & Agr. & Mech. Coll., No. CIV.A. 10-155-JJB-CN, 2011 WL 320921 (M.D. La. Jan. 28, 2011)

van Heerden – Round II, the stigma+ case – LSU settles stigma+ claims.

Warning – the news story is ONLY what the plaintiff’s attorney told the press. LSU did not comment. There is no reason to assume that facts in the story are a full and correct version of what actually happened. More generally, never trust legal opinions on facts – unless the court has appointed an independent expert, the court has no access to an unbiased version of the facts. The opinion usually represents the facts that the judge finds most attractive, based on the judge’s lay knowledge of the subject and personal views. As we will see later in the course when we look at the Katrina cases related to the facts in the news story on van Heerden, the judicial review of the facts in the Katrina cases is at odds with the scientific knowledge of why New Orleans flooded.

Video – Chapter 4  – The Employment Cases

PowerPoint – Chapter 4 – The Employment Cases

Video – Chapter 4 – Introduction to Liberty Interests

PowerPoint – Chapter 4 – Introduction to Liberty Interests

Video – Chapter 4 – Liberty Interests in Prisons

PowerPoint – Chapter 4 – Liberty Interests in Prisons

This completes the assignments for Week 2.