Ā§91-12Ā  Decisions and orders.Ā  Everydecision and order adverse to a party to the proceeding, rendered by an agencyin a contested case, shall be in writing or stated in the record and shall beaccompanied by separate findings of fact and conclusions of law.Ā  If any partyto the proceeding has filed proposed findings of fact, the agency shallincorporate in its decision a ruling upon each proposed finding so presented.Ā The agency shall notify the parties to the proceeding by delivering or mailinga certified copy of the decision and order and accompanying findings andconclusions within a reasonable time to each party or to the party's attorneyof record. [L 1961, c 103, Ā§12; Supp, Ā§6C-12; HRS Ā§91-12; am L 1980, c 232, Ā§4;gen ch 1985]

 

Case Notes

 

Ā  Order of agency must conform to decision as reflected inagency minutes.Ā  52 H. 221, 473 P.2d 573.

Ā  Although each proposed finding by a party must be ruled upon,a separate ruling on each proposed finding is not indispensable and the agencymay incorporate its findings and rulings in its decision.Ā  54 H. 134, 504 P.2d1214; 4 H. App. 633, 675 P.2d 784.

Ā  Section applies to decision of criminal injuries compensationcommission.Ā  54 H. 294, 506 P.2d 444.

Ā  Agency must make its findings reasonably clear.Ā  54 H. 663,513 P.2d 1376.

Ā  A separate ruling on each proposed finding is not necessary.Ā 57 H. 535, 560 P.2d 1292.

Ā  Findings merely summarizing testimony of witness do notconstitute findings of basic fact.Ā  57 H. 535, 560 P.2d 1292.

Ā  Sufficiency of particularity of ruling on proposed findings.Ā 57 H. 535, 560 P.2d 1292.

Ā  Agency's findings of ultimate facts must be supported byfindings of basic facts which must be supported by the evidence in the record.Ā 60 H. 625, 594 P.2d 612.

Ā  Does not limit board's power to order union to implementstaffing of essential positions.Ā  66 H. 461, 667 P.2d 783.

Ā  Where commissioner followed all relevant administrativerequirements in issuing cease and desist order, holding hearings, responding toexceptions, and scheduling oral arguments, and there was no indication thatnine-month periodĀ  between oral argument and the final order was caused by anunjustified agency decision to postpone resolution of the matter,commissioner's action in issuing final order nine months after oral argumentwas not "characterized by an abuse of discretion or a clearly unwarrantedexercise of discretion" or "made upon unlawful procedure".Ā  112H. 90, 144 P.3d 1.

Ā  Labor and industrial relations appeals board should generallystate whether or not it has applied presumption that claim is for a coveredwork injury.Ā  But failure to do so in instant case did not prejudiceappellant's substantial rights.Ā  1 H. App. 77, 613 P.2d 927.

Ā  Does not require notices of tax assessment be accompanied byfindings of fact and conclusions of law.Ā  6 H. App. 260, 718 P.2d 1122.

Ā  Labor department's decision vacated where decision did notcomply with this section's requirement that decision be accompanied by separatefindings of fact and conclusions of law as decision did not decide whetheremployee's stated reasons for quitting constituted good cause for terminatingemployment.Ā  81 H. 84 (App.), 912 P.2d 581.

Ā  Cited:Ā  9 H. App. 240, 833 P.2d 93.