D.C. Mun. Regs. tit. 1, r. 1-2836

Current through Register Vol. 71, No. 49, December 6, 2024

Rule 1-2836 - RECUSAL; ETHICS COMPLIANCE

2836.1

Whether or not a party has moved for recusal, an Administrative Law Judge who has a personal bias or prejudice in favor of or against any party in an assigned case, or who has another good reason to recuse himself or herself from the case, shall proceed no further in the case, and the case shall be reassigned to another Administrative Law Judge. An Administrative Law Judge may recuse himself or herself from a case only if there is good reason to do so.

2836.2

Administrative Law Judges at all times shall comply with the OAH Code of Judicial Ethics, which shall be available to the public.

2836.3

A party to a case may file a motion to disqualify the presiding Administrative Law Judge for reasons that include, but are not limited to:

(a) The Administrative Law Judge has a personal bias or prejudice concerning a party or a party's lawyer or other representative involved in the proceeding;

(b) The Administrative Law Judge served as lawyer or representative in the matter in controversy, or a lawyer with whom the Administrative Law Judge practiced law served during such association as a lawyer concerning the matter, or the Administrative Law Judge or such lawyer has been a material witness concerning it;

(c) The Administrative Law Judge has served in other governmental employment and in such capacity participated as counsel, adviser or material witness concerning the proceeding or expressed an opinion concerning the merits of the particular case in controversy;

(d) The Administrative Law Judge, individually or as a fiduciary, or the Administrative Law Judge's spouse or minor child residing in the Administrative Law Judge's household, has a more than trivial financial interest in the subject matter in controversy or in a party to the proceeding, or any other interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding; or

(e) The Administrative Law Judge or the Administrative Law Judge's spouse or a person within the third degree of relationship to either of them or the spouse of such person:

(1) Is a party to the proceeding, or an officer, director, or trustee of a party;

(2) Is acting as a lawyer or representative in the proceeding;

(3) Is known by the Administrative Law Judge to have an interest that could be substantially affected by the outcome of the proceeding; or

(4) Is to the Administrative Law Judge's knowledge likely to be a material witness in the proceeding.

2836.4

A motion to disqualify the presiding Administrative Law Judge shall:

(a) Allege the specific facts and reasons upon which the movant relies as the grounds for disqualification. The moving party shall include all grounds for disqualification that are known at the time the motion is filed;

(b) Identify the precise date when the facts constituting the grounds for the motion were discovered by the party or the party's counsel;

(c) Be filed within a reasonable time not to exceed fourteen (14) calendar days after discovery by the party or party's counsel of the facts constituting the grounds for the motion. If a party discovers the grounds for disqualification within fourteen (14) calendar days of a scheduled hearing, the motion shall be filed as soon as practicable; and

(d) Be sworn by the movant or include a legally sufficient affidavit stating the specific facts and evidence supporting the grounds for disqualification.

2836.5

For the purposes of this Rule, the following grounds are not legally sufficient to support a motion to disqualify:

(a) Generalized, speculative, conclusory or unsubstantiated assertions of the grounds set forth in §§ 2836.3;

(b) Complaints of bias or prejudice based on adverse rulings by the Administrative Law Judge or statements and opinions made while ruling on matters before the court;

(c) Complaints of bias or prejudice that would not lead an objectively reasonable observer to conclude that recusal was required; or

(d) Actions taken or statements made by an Administrative Law Judge while disciplining a party or counsel or taking corrective action in order to maintain control and decorum in the courtroom or hearing, unless such statements or actions rise to a level of hostility or unprofessionalism that an objective, reasonable person would acknowledge represents more than mere discipline.

2836.6

The challenged judge shall rule on the motion to disqualify by examining the legal sufficiency of the motion. The challenged judge shall not weigh the evidence or dispute the factual allegations. If the motion is deemed legally sufficient and is granted, the case shall be reassigned to a different Administrative Law Judge. If the motion is denied, judicial review may be sought in accordance with applicable law.

D.C. Mun. Regs. tit. 1, r. 1-2836

Final Rulemaking published at 51 DCR 6399 (June 25, 2004); as amended by Notice of Final Rulemaking published at 57 DCR 12541, 12571 (December 31, 2010); Final Rulemaking published at 63 DCR 6556 (4/29/2016); amended by Final Rulemaking published at 71 DCR 13913 (12/1/2024)

Authority: The Chief Administrative Law Judge of the Office of Administrative Hearings (OAH), pursuant to the authority set forth in Sections 8(a)(7) and 8(b)(7) of the Office of Administrative Hearings Establishment Act of 2001, effective March 6, 2002 (D.C. Law 14-76, D.C. Official Code §§ 2-1831.05(a)(7) and (b)(7)) .