Evidence and Hearings. At all steps of the grievance procedure and arbitration it is the right of the admin- istration/board and the grievant and the Association to be represented.
Evidence and Hearings. 1. Burden of Proof Each of the parties has the burden to explain its respective position, to submit evidence substantiating such position and to prove the facts relied upon it in support of its claim or defense.
Evidence and Hearings. 11.1 The Tribunal shall determine the manner in which the parties shall present their cases. Unless otherwise determined by the Tribunal, the presentation of a party’s case shall include the submission of a pre-hearing memorandum including the following elements:
(a) A statement of facts;
(b) A statement of each claim being asserted;
(c) A statement of the applicable law upon which the party relies;
(d) A statement of the relief requested, including the basis for any damages claimed; and
(e) A statement of the evidence to be presented, including the name, capacity and subject of testimony of any witnesses to be called and an estimate of the amount of time required for the witness’ direct testimony.
11.2 Evidence may be presented in written or oral form as the Tribunal may determine is appropriate. The Tribunal is not required to apply the rules of evidence used in judicial proceedings, provided, however, that the Tribunal shall apply the lawyer-client privilege and the work product immunity. The Tribunal shall determine the applicability of any privilege or immunity and the admissibility, relevance, materiality and weight of the evidence offered.
11.3 The Tribunal, in its discretion, may require the parties to produce evidence in addition to that initially offered. It may also appoint experts whose testimony shall be subject to cross examination and rebuttal.
11.4 The Tribunal shall determine the manner in which witnesses are to be examined. The Tribunal shall have the right to exclude witnesses from hearings during the testimony of other witnesses.
Evidence and Hearings. The Rules do not establish a detailed mandatory hearing procedure but permit the Tribunal to determine the procedure. At least the main features should be established during the pre-hearing conference(s). The Tribunal need not apply rules of evidence used in judicial proceedings, except that the Tribunal is required to apply the attorney-client privilege and the work product immunity when it determines that the same are applicable (Rule 11.2). Self-authentication of documentary exhibits the authenticity of which is not disputed is a widely used practice which reduces hearing time. In cases in which voluminous testimony is expected the hearings will be expedited considerably if the Tribunal requires the direct testimony of all or most witnesses to be submitted in written form before the witness is to appear. This procedure also enables opposing counsel to better prepare for cross-examination. Depositions and affidavits would be admissible in evidence unless the Tribunal rules otherwise. The Tribunal should consider at the pre-hearing conference the imposition of time limits on case presentation, as authorized by Rule 9.2. If necessary, any such limits can be extended. The Rules do not provide specifically for the notice the parties are to be given of hearing dates and times. It is assumed that the Tribunal will give notice in such form and with such lead time as is reasonable under the circumstances. The efficiency of the proceeding will be enhanced substantially if hearings are held consecutively. If the Tribunal heeds every schedule conflict claim and adjournment request by either counsel, the hearings may drag on quite unnecessarily. The Tribunal and/or the parties are likely to request a hearing transcript. Rule 11.3 empowers the Tribunal to appoint neutral experts. We would expect this power to be exercised sparingly, and usually upon consultation with the parties as to the need for a neutral expert, the scope of the assignment, and identification of well qualified candidates. It is not intended that the expert give advice to the Tribunal ex parte; indeed, the Rule entitles the parties to cross examine and to rebut the expert. The conflicting views of partisan experts can lead to confusion rather than elightenment of arbitrators. In appropriate cases the arbitrators might encourage the parties early on, e.g. at the pre-hearing conference, to agree on the joint appointment of a neutral expert. The Rules do not automatically require the submission of pos...
Evidence and Hearings. At all steps of the grievance procedure and arbitration it is the right of the administration/board and the grievant and the Association to be represented.
4.1 Academic Freedom.
