OAH 58-1004-21386-2
STATE OF
OFFICE OF
ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
FOR THE DEPARTMENT
OF COMMERCE
|
In the Matter of the Insurance Producer’s
License of Robert W. Huge; the Insurance Producer’s License of Darin D.
Pavlish; the Insurance Producer’s License of Vickie Lynn Roiger; the Resident
Agency License of Financial Security Consultants LLC; and Donald L. Knutson
and Excel Training |
ORDER ON MOTION OF RESPONDENT PAVLISH FOR DEPARTMENT ORDERS |
By a letter
dated August 12, 2010, Respondent Darin D. Pavlish (Pavlish or Respondent
Pavlish) requested an Order requiring the Department of Commerce (the
Department) to produce Consent Orders issued to attendees at Respondent Huge’s
seminars.
IT IS HEREBY
ORDERED:
1.
By noon,
Friday August 20, 2010, the Department shall provide to Respondent Pavlish the
names of any attendees at Respondent Huge’s course with whom the Department has
entered into a fully executed Consent Order.
2.
This
Order shall be served on all parties by email as well as U.S. Mail.
Dated: August 19, 2010
s/
|
LINDA
F. CLOSE Administrative
Law Judge |
MEMORANDUM
The
Department expressed its position on the disclosure of the requested
information in a cover letter to its response to another motion of
Pavlish. The Department argues that some
of these orders are proposed and are therefore private or confidential date
under Minn. Stat. § 13.39, subd. 2. The
Department further states that executed orders are available on its website as
public data, implying that it has no obligation to point Pavlish to relevant
orders if any.
Administrative
Law Judges at the Office of Administrative Hearings have traditionally been
liberal in granting discovery when the request is not used to oppress the
opposing party in cases involving limited issues or amounts.[1] Both parties to contested case proceedings
involving regulatory discipline are permitted to conduct discovery as to the
issues and claims in the case and to gather potential impeachment
evidence. Moreover, these purposes have been regarded as consistent with
the Minnesota Administrative Procedure Act (APA) and the rules of the Office of
Administrative Hearings.[2]
Pavlish has
raised legal defenses that may be relevant to the Department in determining
what, if any, sanction it should apply to him.
Among other defenses, he has argued that equal protection requires that
the Department impose no greater penalty on him than on other
similarly-situated attendees.
The ALJ,
without suggesting anything about the merits of Pavlish’s legal arguments,
orders the Department to provide the names of Huge-course attendees who have
entered into public Consent Orders with the Department. The Department no doubt has easy access to
the names of any licensees who have entered into such Orders. Given the short timelines for this case, it is
fair for the Department to disclose this information to provide easy access to
those orders on the Department’s website.
L. F. C.