- 8 -
(e.g., "Tr. __, lines__."). For the most part, the subsection
contains a mish-mash of facts and arguments that we cannot
separate. In making our findings of fact, we have considered
those portions of the subsection that address respondent's
proposed findings of fact and that set forth specific objections.
We have not considered those portions of the subsection that set
forth alternative proposed findings of fact. We have not done so
for the following reasons: Those portions do not comply with the
requirements of Rule 151(e)(3) for proposed findings.
Respondent has had no opportunity to respond to those proposals.
Petitioners cannot escape their initial failure to make
acceptable proposed findings simply by proposing alternatives to
respondent's findings. We extended petitioners' time to file
their answering brief at least three times. It would be unfair
to visit on respondent the additional delay involved in requiring
a response.
In arriving at our findings of fact, we have taken into
account those facts that have been stipulated, and have accepted
certain facts proposed by respondent. We have examined both the
exhibits in evidence and the transcript of the trial, and we have
found certain facts based on those examinations.
Burden of Proof
Also, before proceeding, we wish to comment on what appears
to be petitioners' misunderstanding of the burden of proof. In
their briefs, petitioners repeatedly state or imply that it is
Page: Previous 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 Next
Last modified: May 25, 2011