Hi !
Any one know of any significant case law in respect to the board's procedures or board opinions or rulings?
Just doing hearing prep.
I do, I gleaned 50 cases of appellants who lost at the board, and appealed, from the law library, and sent myself the judicial opinions and I narrowed down to see what the procedures are To build myself a rulebook, of What the board should be doing. What I noticed through a year and a half of hearings is that the board members are nice guys, they at time's, talk to you like there your friend a lot of times trying to get things on record, depending which one, they are attempting to screw you out of your permit. Due to their own opinion, not based on the law or the definitions, in these judicial rulings. I saw a lot of things, totally unorthodox when it comes to the rules of evidence, there is a way to present a case, and under Most circumstances a one line simple objection "needs to be made", the case must be presented in essence "to the judicial review board", or the other option most take, is to go in and beg for their right, you don't appear to be a beggar.
Some of the board members try to make you feel like you have to "come clean" to their questions they actually have no right to ask, And if you answer you're totally screwed because you're begging for something you're not going to get, a simple objection would suffice, comfort knowing that this is going to the judicial review process and that is the only way to guarantee your permit and that the rules are followed. Most appellants including their attorneys are lazy and say thing's on record hoping to get a quick fix, ie the board to vote to issue the permit, But the problem with that is some of the board members vote based on their personal opinion and not the law. In essence answering the unfounded questions you just screwed yourself during the judicial review process the judge will say that you answered the questions therefore no rules were broken, I saw that come up time and time again.
When one reads through this many judicial opinions you get a sense and written understanding from judges, with what the board should and shouldn't be doing, the judges, Make very clear in every judicial opinion that their job is not do not retry the case, they simply make sure that the rules were not broken, as laxed
As they are.
It probably wouldn't hurt to put in some case law with judicial opinions from appellants, V. the board of firearms examiners on record. I also was able to draw the inference the volunteer board members don't like when people file appeals because it, from what I was able to gather, is a very laborfull process for them, and there volunteers. It's a little harder than just showing up listening to some stories and voting.