Issue: Under Minnesota law, what is the standard of proof for a Commissioner or Department when seeking to revoke a license?
| Area of Law: | Administrative Law, Administrative Law & Regulation (Federal and State), Litigation & Procedure |
| Keywords: | Burden of proof; License revocation; Preponderance of the evidence |
| Jurisdiction: | Minnesota |
| Cited Cases: | None |
| Cited Statutes: | Minn. R. 1400.7300, subp. 5. |
| Date: | 09/01/2014 |
The Department bears the burden of proof to show by a preponderance of the evidence that Respondent failed to correct the alleged violations and that Respondent committed repeated violations of statute and rules sufficient to justify the draconian penalty of license revocation. Minn. R. 1400.7300, subp. 5. The Rule provides:
5. BURDEN OF PROOF. The party proposing that certain action be taken must prove the facts at issue by a preponderance of the evidence, unless the substantive law provides a different burden or standard. A party asserting an affirmative defense shall have the burden of proving the existence of the defense by a preponderance of the evidence. In employee disciplinary actions, the agency or political subdivision initiating the disciplinary action shall have the burden of proof.
Id.
[…]