Ins 5.35(3)(b) (b) Paragraph (a) does not apply to witnesses or evidence used solely to impeach witness testimony.

Ins 5.35(3)(c) (c) After considering all of the following and any other relevant factors, the administrative law judge may exclude evidence offered by a party who, without showing good cause, fails to comply with par. (a):

Ins 5.35(3)(c)1. 1. The prejudice or surprise to the party against whom the evidence is offered and the ability of the party to cure any prejudice.

Ins 5.35(3)(c)2. 2. The extent to which waiver of the requirements of par. (a) would disrupt the orderly and efficient hearing of the contested case.

Ins 5.35(3)(c)3. 3. Bad faith or willfulness in failing to comply with par. (a).

Ins 5.35(4) (4) Protective orders. Upon motion by any party, and for good cause shown, the administrative law judge may issue a protective order under s. 804.01 (3), Stats., limiting discovery in any contested case, including a class 2 contested case.

Ins 5.35(5) (5) Order compelling discovery. If a person fails to respond to a discovery request under this section, the party seeking discovery may move the administrative law judge for an order compelling discovery. Upon motion by any party, the administrative law judge may issue an order compelling discovery under s. 804.12, Stats.

Ins 5.35 History History: Cr. Register, March, 1996, No. 483, eff. 4-1-96.

Ins 5.37 Ins 5.37 Stipulations; settlement.

Ins 5.37(1) (1) Stipulations. The parties may stipulate to any matter at issue in a contested case. The parties may submit a written stipulation signed by the parties to the administrative law judge who shall enter it in the record. During a proceeding, the administrative law judge, or any of the parties at the direction of the administrative law judge, shall dictate the contents of any oral stipulation for inclusion in the record.

Ins 5.37(2) (2) Settlement. At any time during a contested case proceeding, the parties may agree to settle the case. The parties shall notify the administrative law judge of the agreement to settle.

Ins 5.37 History History: Cr. Register, March, 1996, No. 483, eff. 4-1-96.

Ins 5.39 Ins 5.39 Hearing.

Ins 5.39(1) (1) Date, time and location.

Ins 5.39(1)(a) (a) A hearing shall be held at the date, time and location specified in the notice of hearing under s. Ins 5.12, or at another date, time and location ordered by the administrative law judge. In rescheduling the date, time and location, the administrative law judge shall consider all of the following:

Ins 5.39(1)(a)1. 1. The location and convenience of office staff involved in the proceeding.

Ins 5.39(1)(a)2. 2. The location and convenience of witnesses.

Ins 5.39(1)(a)3. 3. The location and convenience of the parties.

Ins 5.39(1)(b) (b) A hearing, or any portion of a hearing, may be held by telephone or video-conference if the administrative law judge determines that this method is justified for the convenience of any party or witness, and that no party is unfairly prejudiced by this method. The party calling a witness to testify by telephone or video-conference shall notify the administrative law judge before the hearing to allow for making the necessary arrangements and is responsible for providing the witness with a complete set of numbered copies of all exhibits.

Ins 5.39(1)(c) (c) The administrative law judge may adjourn, recess or postpone a hearing as he or she considers appropriate.

Ins 5.39(2) (2) Opening hearing.

Ins 5.39(2)(a) (a) The administrative law judge shall open the hearing with a concise statement of its scope and purpose and shall enter the appearances in the record. If the administrative law judge permits opening statements, they shall be limited to the following:

Ins 5.39(2)(a)1. 1. A brief summary or outline in clear and concise form of the evidence intended to be offered.

Ins 5.39(2)(a)2. 2. A statement of the ultimate legal points relied upon.

Ins 5.39(2)(b) (b) Opening statements are optional with each party, and do not constitute evidence. The administrative law judge may limit the length of opening statements.

Ins 5.39(3) (3) Order of hearing; burden of proof.

Ins 5.39(3)(a) (a) In a class 1 proceeding where the office has denied a license application, the office shall proceed first with the presentation of evidence. The petitioner has the burden of proving, by a preponderance of the evidence, that the denial should be modified or rescinded.

Ins 5.39(3)(b) (b) In a class 2 proceeding, the office shall proceed first with the presentation of evidence and has the burden of proving its case by a preponderance of the evidence.

Ins 5.39(3)(c) (c) In any case not governed by par. (a) or (b), the petitioner shall proceed first with the presentation of evidence unless the administrative law judge specifies a different order of proof to promote an orderly consideration of the contested case. The petitioner has the burden of proof unless the administrative law judge orders otherwise. The standard of proof shall be a preponderance of the evidence. The rules of civil procedure for actions in circuit court shall guide the administrative law judge in deciding the order of proof and the party having the burden of proof, if disputed.