AWARDS 65 - DOUBLE JEOPARDY IN DISCIPLINE CASES

Fourth Division Award No. 3649 (Van Wart)

"However, as to the procedural objection of double jeopardy raised, concerning the August 19, 1979 Hearing, it is found to be with merit and will be upheld.

"Claimant was given notice of a Hearing to be held on August 9, 1977. He was properly charged. The Hearing on such charge opened, on August 9th, and testimony in connection therewith commenced to be taken. Consequently, at that point in time jeopardy to Claimant had attached. It is concluded on the record established, that, the Hearing Officer, upon motion of Claimant's Representative to cancel the Hearing, chose to act affirmatively thereon. He canceled, not recessed, that Hearing. having done so the charges that bottomed the purpose for which that Hearing was held, were, at that point, laid to rest. Cancel, in its ordinary useage (sic), means to avoid or invalidate. Thus, in such circumstances as here the Claimant could not be again charged, tried and disciplined on the same charges. Consequently, the Board is impelled to find that the Hearing held on August 19, 1977, from which discipline ensued was improper, the latter hearing represented double jeopardy.

"In view of the conclusion reached it will therefore not be necessary to reach and pass upon the other questions raised."