1. (a) Testimony shall be received and recorded at the hearing before the board. The hearing before the Secretary will be held for purpose of reviewing the legal questions involved. However, additional testimony may be taken at the discretion of the hearing examiner.
2. (b) Where there has been no prior hearing before the board, testimony may be taken subject to the discretion of the hearing examiner.

3. (c) If either party to a proceeding wishes to offer testimony, a notice of intent to offer testimony shall be delivered to the Secretary and to opposing counsel at least 14 days before the hearing. Included in the notice of intent shall be:

   1. (1) The name and position of each person who is to offer testimony.
   2. (2) An explanation of the purpose and scope of the testimony to be offered.

Source

The provisions of this § 351.8 adopted March 31, 1978, effective April 1, 1978, 8 Pa.B. 830; amended August 25, 1978, effective August 26, 1978, 8 Pa.B. 830. Immediately preceding text appears at serial page (35181).

Notes of Decisions

Discretion

Even if the petition had provided additional evidence to the secretary at least 14 days before the hearing, it was still within the secretary’s discretion to admit or refuse that evidence. Dohanic v. Department of Education, 533 A.2d 812 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1987); appeal denied 541 A.2d 1392 (Pa. 1988).

Where dismissed teacher’s notice of intent to offer additional testimony was delivered to the Secretary of Education only 10 days in advance of the scheduled hearing date and that notice gave no indication of the purpose or scope of the proposed testimony, the teacher had not complied with the provisions of 22 Pa. Code § 351.8(c) requiring delivery at least 14 days prior to the hearing and the Secretary did not abuse her discretion in refusing to accept the additional testimony. Keating v. Board of School Directors of the Riverside School District, 513 A.2d 547 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1986); appeal denied 522 A.2d 51 (Pa. 1987).

Verbal Notice

Petitioner’s allegation to the Secretary that he verbally informed the School Board of his refusal to consent to a change in positions, which appeared for the first time in Petitioner’s Brief opposing a Motion to Quash based on his failure to request a Board hearing, was not sufficient to meet the requirements of this section. Walsh v. Sto-Rox School District, 532 A.2d 547 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1987).