MARVIN MANDEL, Governor                                       101

DETERMINATION OF THE CONTROVERSY.

REVISOR'S NOTE: This section is new language
derived from Art. 7, §5 (a) and (b) .
Provisions of subsection (a) and (b) have
been separated from other provisions of §5
to emphasize the difference between the
provisions and enhance clarity. In
subsection (b), the provisions dealing with
quorum necessary for an arbitration hearing
is modified to include an exception for an
arbitrator who ceases to act during the
course of the hearing in accordance with
§3-215(b).

SEC. 3-214. RIGHTS OF PARTIES AT ARBITRATION HEARING;
RULES OF EVIDENCE.

(A)   IN GENERAL.

AT AN ARBITRATION HEARING, THE PARTIES HAVE THE
RIGHT:

(1)   TO BE HEARD;

(2)   TO PRESENT EVIDENCE MATERIAL TO THE
CONTROVERSY; AND

(3)    TO CROSS EXAMINE WITNESSES WHO APPEAR
AT THE HEARING.

(B)   ARBITRATORS NOT BOUND BY RULES OF EVIDENCE.

ARBITRATORS ARE NOT BOUND BY THE TECHNICAL
RULES OF EVIDENCE.

REVISOR'S NOTE: This section is new language
derived from Art. 7, §5 (c).

In subsection (b) the term "technical rules
of evidence" is retained. The term appears
in at least one other place in the Code.
Art. 81, §229(f) provides that the Maryland
Tax Court "shall not be bound by the
technical rules of evidence"; see
Fairchild—Hiller Corporation v. Supervisor
of Assessments, 276 Md. App. 519 (1973).

While the Administrative Procedure Act does
not contain the specific phrase, the
provisions of that statute dealing with