Postponement of hearing

The hearing examiner has the authority to postpone the time or change the place of a hearing when the examiner decides convenience or necessity so requires. See 1921.11.

• This authority is granted to the hearing examiner by the rule in 1921.11.
• The broader part covering rules of practice is 1921.

A hearing examiner may postpone a hearing if, in the examiner’s judgment, "convenience or necessity" so requires. See 1921.11.

• The standard uses the broad terms "convenience" and "necessity," leaving the ultimate decision to the examiner’s discretion.
• Because the text is short, it does not list specific examples of what counts as convenience or necessity; the examiner evaluates each situation under that standard.

Yes. Under 1921.11, a hearing examiner may change the place of the hearing if, in the examiner’s judgment, convenience or necessity so requires — consent of the parties is not a condition stated in the rule.

• The rule vests this discretion in the examiner rather than making party consent a requirement.
• Other procedural rules elsewhere in 1921 may govern notice or related matters, but 1921.11 itself requires only the examiner’s judgment.

No. Under 1921.11, there is no automatic right for a party to obtain a postponement or change of place; such relief is granted only if the hearing examiner determines that convenience or necessity so requires.

• The rule places the decision in the examiner’s discretion rather than creating a party entitlement.
• Parties may request a postponement or change, but the standard does not make granting such requests mandatory.

Yes. The phrase "in the judgment of the hearing examiner" in 1921.11 indicates that the power to postpone or change place is discretionary and depends on the examiner’s evaluation of convenience or necessity.

• That discretionary language gives the examiner flexibility to weigh circumstances in each case.
• The rule does not prescribe specific factors or mandatory criteria for that judgment.

Yes—emergencies can be a form of "necessity," and under 1921.11 the hearing examiner may postpone or change the place when, in the examiner’s judgment, convenience or necessity so requires.

• The statute’s use of "necessity" is broad and includes urgent situations such as emergencies, although 1921.11 does not list examples.
• The examiner decides whether the specific emergency meets the standard of necessity in the particular case.

No. 1921.11 does not set any time limits or maximum duration for a postponement; it simply authorizes the examiner to postpone when convenience or necessity so requires.

• Because the rule contains no duration limits, the timing is left to the examiner’s discretion and any other applicable procedural rules in 1921.

No explicit requirement to state reasons is set forth in 1921.11; the rule simply authorizes the examiner to act when, in the examiner’s judgment, convenience or necessity so requires.

• While 1921.11 does not mandate written findings, other procedural rules or good practice may call for documenting the basis for significant scheduling decisions.
• Parties concerned about the basis for a change may raise the matter with the examiner through the usual procedural channels under 1921.

The text of 1921.11 states the examiner may "change the place of the hearing" when convenience or necessity so requires, but it does not prescribe the manner or timing for specifying a new location.

• The rule authorizes a change in place but does not include procedural details about how or when the new place must be announced.
• Parties should look to other procedural provisions in 1921 or instructions from the examiner for the practical steps after a change is ordered.

Yes. 1921.11 authorizes the hearing examiner to postpone the time or change the place of the hearing when convenience or necessity so requires; it allows the examiner to take either or both actions as warranted by the circumstances.

• The wording permits postponing the time, changing the place, or both, depending on the examiner’s judgment.
• The examiner’s authority covers any combination needed to serve convenience or necessity.

No specific geographic limitation is stated in 1921.11; the rule simply authorizes the hearing examiner to "change the place of the hearing" if convenience or necessity so requires, leaving the scope of change to the examiner’s judgment.

• Because the rule provides no explicit geographic limits, the examiner’s discretion governs whether a move to a different state is appropriate in a particular case.
• Practical or jurisdictional constraints and other provisions of 1921 may affect such decisions, even though 1921.11 itself does not set those limits.

Yes. Under 1921.11, the examiner decides whether convenience or necessity so requires postponement; a party’s claim of hardship does not automatically entitle them to a postponement.

• The examiner assesses claims such as hardship against the standards of convenience or necessity.
• Because the rule vests discretion in the examiner, outcomes depend on the examiner’s judgment in each case.

The rule in 1921.11 applies broadly to "the hearing" and authorizes the examiner to postpone the time or change the place of the hearing when convenience or necessity so requires; it does not limit the authority to initial versus continuation hearings.

• The text does not distinguish between different types of hearings, so the examiner’s authority can be applied to any hearing covered by the Part 1921 rules.
• For specific procedural distinctions, refer to other sections of 1921.

You can read the official rule authorizing postponement or change of place at 1921.11, which states the hearing examiner may postpone the time or change the place of the hearing if, in the examiner’s judgment, convenience or necessity so requires.

• The rule is part of the broader 1921 rules of practice governing hearings under this part.