Case Summary
| Case ID |
«Matter Matter ID» |
| Agency |
ADRE |
| Tribunal |
OAH |
| Decision Date |
1996-07-04 |
| Administrative Law Judge |
«Professional Full Name» |
| Outcome |
complete |
| Filing Fees Refunded |
$0.00 |
| Civil Penalties |
$0.00 |
Parties & Counsel
| Petitioner |
«Client Contact Full Name» |
Counsel |
— |
| Respondent |
«Client Contact Company» |
Counsel |
— |
Alleged Violations
No violations listed
Key Issues & Findings
statute
Filing fee: $0.00, Fee refunded: No
Decision Documents
18F-H1717040-REL Decision – 634939.pdf
Uploaded 2025-10-09T03:31:54 (39.0 KB)
Briefing Doc – 18F-H1717040-REL
Briefing on the Administrative Law Judge Decision Document
Executive Summary
The source material provides a standardized template for an “Administrative Law Judge Decision” issued by the Office of Administrative Hearings located in Phoenix, Arizona. The document is structured to formalize the outcome of an administrative hearing, delineating key procedural and case-specific information. Its core components include sections for case identification, hearing details, participant appearances, and the presiding judge’s official signature. A notable feature is the explicit protocol for electronic transmission of the final decision to a designated client contact, indicating a formalized digital workflow. The template utilizes a series of placeholders to be populated with specific details for each case.
Document Origin and Jurisdiction
The document template originates from a specific governmental body, establishing its context and authority within an administrative legal framework.
• Issuing Authority: Office of Administrative Hearings
• Physical Address: 1740 West Adams Street, Lower Level, Phoenix, Arizona 85007
This information firmly places the document within the purview of this Arizona-based administrative office.
Core Components of the Decision Template
The template is systematically organized to ensure all critical information for a legal decision is captured and presented clearly.
1. Case Identification
The header section is designed to uniquely identify the matter being adjudicated.
• Case Number: The document includes a field for a unique identifier, denoted as No. «Matter Matter ID».
• Matter Notes: A placeholder, «Matter Notes», is provided at the top, likely for a case title, subject matter, or other essential preliminary information.
2. Hearing and Participant Details
The template formalizes the record of the hearing and its attendees.
• Hearing Information: A dedicated HEARING: section is included to record the specifics of the hearing itself, such as the date and nature of the proceedings.
• Appearances: A section labeled APPEARANCES: is designated for listing the parties and representatives who were present.
• Presiding Judge: The decision is attributed to a specific judge, identified by the placeholder ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE: «Professional Full Name».
3. Decision and Execution
The concluding section of the template is structured for the formal issuance and authentication of the judge’s decision.
• Date of Decision: The document is dated with the line: Done this day, «Today: July 4, 1996».
• Judge’s Signature: A formal signature line is provided for the judge: /s/ «Professional Full Name» Administrative Law Judge.
4. Transmission Protocol
The template includes explicit instructions for the document’s dissemination after being finalized.
• Method of Delivery: The document specifies it is “Transmitted electronically to:”.
• Recipient Information: It contains placeholders to detail the recipient, including their full name («Client Contact Full Name»), title («Client Contact Title»), and organization («Client Contact Company»).
Analysis of Placeholder Fields
The template’s functionality relies on a series of placeholder fields, which reveal the specific data points required to complete a formal decision document.
Placeholder Field
Inferred Purpose
«Matter Notes»
To be replaced with the case title, subject, or other key contextual notes.
«Matter Matter ID»
The unique docket or case number assigned to the administrative matter.
«Professional Full Name»
The full name of the presiding Administrative Law Judge; used in two locations.
«Today: July 4, 1996»
The specific date on which the judge finalizes and issues the decision.
«Client Contact Full Name»
The full name of the primary contact person receiving the decision.
«Client Contact Title»
The professional title of the recipient.
«Client Contact Company»
The company or organization to which the recipient belongs.
Study Guide – 18F-H1717040-REL
Study Guide: Administrative Law Judge Decision Document
This guide provides a detailed review of the structure, components, and terminology found within the provided document template from the Office of Administrative Hearings.
Quiz: Short Answer Questions
Instructions: Answer the following questions in two to three complete sentences, based solely on the information provided in the source document.
1. What is the official name and full address of the government body that issues this document?
2. What is the formal title of the document, and what is the title of the official who signs it?
3. How is the document delivered to its intended recipient after being finalized?
4. Identify two placeholders in the document that are used to specify the unique details of a particular case.
5. What two distinct sections are designated in the body of the document’s template, apart from the header and signature blocks?
6. Who is the specific audience for the electronic transmission of this document, as indicated by the placeholders?
7. What information is located in the header of the document?
8. Describe the function of the placeholder «Professional Full Name» in the context of this document.
9. What action is indicated as being completed on the date specified by the «Today: July 4, 1996» placeholder?
10. Where is the Office of Administrative Hearings located within its building?
——————————————————————————–
Answer Key
1. The issuing body is the Office of Administrative Hearings. Its full address is 1740 West Adams Street, Lower Level, Phoenix, Arizona 85007.
2. The formal title of the document is “ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION.” The official who signs the document holds the title of “Administrative Law Judge.”
3. After being finalized and signed, the document is “Transmitted electronically” to the designated client contact.
4. The placeholders «Matter Notes» and No. «Matter Matter ID» are used to specify the unique details of a case. These likely correspond to a short description or title of the matter and its official case number.
5. The two distinct sections designated in the body of the template are “HEARING” and “APPEARANCES.” These sections are intended to contain details about the proceeding and the parties involved.
6. The audience for the electronic transmission is a specific individual identified by placeholders for their full name («Client Contact Full Name»), professional title («Client Contact Title»), and company («Client Contact Company»).
7. The header contains the name of the issuing body, the Office of Administrative Hearings, and its physical address. It also includes the case identifier («Matter Matter ID») and a space for case notes («Matter Notes»).
8. The placeholder «Professional Full Name» appears twice. It is used for the name of the presiding Administrative Law Judge in the main body and again above the signature line to indicate which judge authored and signed the decision.
9. The date placeholder signifies when the decision was officially completed and signed by the Administrative Law Judge. The document states, “Done this day,” followed by the date.
10. The Office of Administrative Hearings is located on the “Lower Level” of the building at 1740 West Adams Street.
——————————————————————————–
Essay Questions
Instructions: The following questions are designed to encourage a deeper, more analytical understanding of the document. Formulate a comprehensive response to each prompt.
1. Describe the structure and key components of the “ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION” document as presented in the source. What does this structure suggest about the formal legal process it represents?
2. Analyze the role of placeholders (e.g., «Matter Matter ID», «Professional Full Name», «Client Contact Company») in this document. Discuss their function in transforming a generic template into a case-specific official record.
3. Based on the information provided, explain the complete procedural flow of this document, from its creation and signing by an Administrative Law Judge to its final delivery.
4. Discuss the significance of the “Office of Administrative Hearings” and the “Administrative Law Judge” in the context of the legal system, as implied by the details in this document template.
5. Evaluate the methods of communication and record-keeping indicated in the source text (e.g., electronic transmission, formal titling, unique case identifiers). How do these elements contribute to the document’s authority and administrative efficiency?
——————————————————————————–
Glossary of Terms
Definition
Administrative Law Judge
The title of the presiding official within the Office of Administrative Hearings who signs and issues the formal decision.
Administrative Law Judge Decision
The formal title of the document, indicating it is the official ruling resulting from a hearing conducted by an Administrative Law Judge.
Appearances
A designated section in the document template, intended to formally list the parties and/or legal counsel who participated in the hearing.
Hearing
A designated section in the document template, referring to the formal proceeding where arguments and evidence were presented before the Administrative Law Judge.
Matter Matter ID
A placeholder for the unique numerical or alphanumerical identifier assigned to a specific legal case or matter.
Matter Notes
A placeholder at the top of the document, likely used for a brief title or summary description of the legal case.
Office of Administrative Hearings
The governmental body, located in Phoenix, Arizona, that is responsible for conducting hearings and issuing administrative law decisions.
Transmitted electronically
The official method specified for the delivery of the finalized and signed decision document to the designated recipient.
Blog Post – 18F-H1717040-REL
What a Blank Legal Form Reveals About the Systems We Live In
Introduction: The Stories Hidden in Plain Sight
We tend to see legal documents as the epitome of boring: dense, intimidating, and irrelevant until we’re forced to deal with them. They are the paperwork we ignore, the fine print we scroll past. But what if even the most mundane administrative form held surprising insights into the systems that shape our society? A closer look at a template for an “ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE DECISION” from the Office of Administrative Hearings in Phoenix, Arizona, reveals just that. This single page exposes the inherent tension in modern justice: the system’s need for standardized, machine-like efficiency clashing with the unique, messy human stories it is built to process. Let’s explore the lessons hidden within its structure.
The Unexpected Takeaways
The first thing one notices is not a dramatic narrative but a series of placeholders: «Matter Matter ID», «Matter Notes», and «Professional Full Name». Running down the left margin are line numbers, 1 through 30, a tool for absolute precision, allowing legal professionals to reference exact parts of the document in future arguments. This is not a unique script for a high-stakes battle; it is a template, a fill-in-the-blanks form.
This reality stands in stark contrast to the dramatic courtroom scenes portrayed in media. The day-to-day process of justice is less about impassioned speeches and more about systematic procedure. From a systems analyst’s perspective, this banality is a cornerstone of fairness. Templates, line numbers, and standardization are mechanisms designed to reduce variance and ensure predictable outputs. They ensure each case is processed through the same structural lens, making justice a repeatable, and therefore equitable, procedure. But within this rigid template, the system must still make space for the very thing it seeks to control: people.
While the format is rigid, it is ultimately a vessel for human conflict. The fields for APPEARANCES and the ADMINISTRATIVE LAW JUDGE are waiting for human names. But the analysis deepens when we see the recipient information: «Client Contact Full Name», «Client Contact Title», and «Client Contact Company». The system needs to know not just who you are, but what you do and who you represent.
This form acts as an input protocol, designed to convert a complex human narrative into structured, machine-readable data for the legal system. Each filled-out template signifies a human story—a dispute, a claim, a need—being processed. It reveals that the system sees people not just as individuals, but as actors within a larger organizational and economic context. It’s a framework built to contain the messiness of human affairs, reminding us that even our most personal problems must be assigned a title and a case number to be resolved. And this system, designed to process human data, is itself grounded in a very real place.
The law can feel like an abstract, untouchable force. Yet, printed at the top of the form is a concrete, physical location: Office of Administrative Hearings 1740 West Adams Street, Lower Level Phoenix, Arizona 85007.
This small detail grounds the entire process in reality. The law isn’t just an idea; it’s an institution run by people working in a specific building. Decisions that impact lives are made not in some ethereal cloud of authority, but in a lower-level office on West Adams Street. This detail demystifies the system, making it more tangible and, perhaps, more accountable. And it is in this physical building, steeped in procedural tradition, that we find the most telling signs of adaptation to a new world.
The document announces its formal gravity with an almost archaic header: IN THE OFFICE OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS. This language evokes a sense of place, history, and tradition. Yet, this tradition is forced to confront modernity in a few subtle keystrokes. Below the formal signature line for the judge, we find /s/ «Professional Full Name».
That /s/ is a ghost in the machine. It is a modern typographic convention signifying a digital signature, a symbol that represents the authority of a handwritten signature in an electronic context. This quiet nod to the digital age is confirmed by the final line on the page: Transmitted electronically. The juxtaposition is powerful. A document that begins with the formal weight of a physical office ends with the frictionless speed of digital transmission. This, combined with a legacy placeholder date of «Today: July 4, 1996», paints a perfect picture of an institution in transition, holding onto its analog legacy while operating with the tools of the present.
Conclusion: Finding Meaning in the Margins
Insightful truths about our society are not always found in grand pronouncements. Sometimes, they are quietly embedded in the structure of administrative paperwork, revealing the constant negotiation between systematic order and human reality. By looking closely at the mundane, we uncover the logic, values, and contradictions of the complex world we have built—a world of templates designed to process unique lives, and of digital signatures that carry the weight of centuries of law.
What other everyday documents do we overlook, and what stories might they tell if we looked closer?
Case Participants
Neutral Parties
- «Professional Full Name» (ALJ)
Other Participants
- «Client Contact Full Name» (client contact)
«Client Contact Company»
«Client Contact Title»
