Adjudications are the administrative equivalent of court trials. Although the procedures and formalities are more relaxed than in traditional court trials, and may vary significantly from case to case, affected parties may have process rights. In more formal cases, this may include the right to present evidence, examine and cross-examine witnesses, and make arguments to a presiding agency official.

For this process to work, all parties must receive notice of an impending adjudication. The APA requires that parties be “timely informed” of the time, place, and nature of the hearing. The reason for requiring notice of the time and location of a hearing is obvious: people and organizations that may be impacted need to be aware that something may happen so that they may respond. To be timely, notice must be made far enough in advance of a hearing to allow the parties to adequately prepare their cases. A few hours’ notice is not likely to be adequate in any circumstance.

Notice of both legal and factual issues must be made under the APA. At a hearing, the agency may try new issues as long as it is reasonable to do so. If a new issue is so unrelated to the issues described in the notice that a party could not have been prepared to address them, a continuance must be granted. Surprise by an agency is violative of due process. Notices will not be invalidated because of technical defects. The purpose behind notice pleading is to make the parties aware of the issues to be tried at the hearing.

Therefore, a technical defect, such as a misspelled name, does not invalidate a notice. Of course, an incorrect hearing date likely violates due process.