In individual proceedings:

1. Agencies may admit and give probative effect to evidence which possesses probative value commonly accepted by reasonably prudent persons in the conduct of their affairs. They shall give effect to the rules of privilege recognized by law in respect to: self-incrimination; confidential communications between husband and wife during the subsistence of the marriage relation; communication between attorney and client, made in that relation; confessions made to a clergyman or priest in his or her professional capacity in the course of discipline enjoined by the church to which he or she belongs; communications made by a patient to a licensed practitioner of one of the healing arts with reference to any physical or supposed physical disease or of knowledge gained by a practitioner through a physical examination of a patient made in a professional capacity; records and files of any official or agency of any state or of the United States which, by any statute of a state or of the United States are made confidential and privileged. No greater exclusionary effect shall be given any such rule or privilege than would obtain in an action in court. Agencies may exclude incompetent, irrelevant, immaterial and unduly repetitious evidence. Objections to evidentiary offers may be made and shall be noted in the record. Subject to these requirements, when a hearing will be expedited and the interests of the parties will not be prejudiced substantially, any part of the evidence may be received in written form;

2. Documentary evidence may be received in the form of copies or excerpts, if the original is not readily available. Upon request, parties shall be given an opportunity to compare the copy with the original;

3. A party may conduct cross-examinations required for a full and true disclosure of the facts;

4. Notice may be taken of judicially cognizable facts. In addition, notice may be taken of generally recognized technical or scientific facts within the agency's specialized knowledge. Parties shall be notified either before or during the hearing, or by reference in preliminary reports or otherwise, of the material noticed, including any staff memoranda or data, and they shall be afforded an opportunity to contest the material so noticed. The agency's experience, technical competence, and specialized knowledge may be utilized in the evaluation of the evidence.

5. Any party shall at all times have the right to counsel, provided that counsel must be duly licensed to practice law by the Supreme Court of Oklahoma, and provided further that such counsel shall have the right to appear and act for and on behalf of the party represented.

6. A party may request the exclusion of witnesses to the extent and for the purposes stated in Section 2615 of Title 12 of the Oklahoma Statutes. Exclusion of a witness shall not be a violation of the Oklahoma Open Meeting Act.

Historical Data

---

Laws 1963, HB 865, c. 371, � 10; Amended by Laws 1999, SB 263, c. 46, � 1, eff. November 1, 1999 (superseded document available).

Citationizer^� Summary of Documents Citing This Document

---

Cite	Name	Ebene
Oklahoma Attorney General's Opinions
	Cite	Name	Ebene
	1981 OK AG 142,	Question Submitted by: Mr. Jack Boyd, Director, Oklahoma Health Planning Commission	Cited
	1981 OK AG 29,	Question Submitted by: Mr. James H. Page, Executive Director, Oklahoma Employment Security Commission	Discussed
Oklahoma Court of Civil Appeals Cases
	Cite	Name	Ebene
	2011 OK CIV APP 62, 259 P.3d 872,	GLOVER v. OKLAHOMA DEPT. OF TRANSPORTATION	Cited
	2013 OK CIV APP 46, 301 P.3d 885,	MOORE v. OKLAHOMA EMPLOYMENT SECURITY COMMISSION	Discussed at Length
	2015 OK CIV APP 93, 361 P.3d 543,	GILLISPIE v. ESTES EXPRESS LINES, INC.	Cited
Oklahoma Supreme Court Cases
	Cite	Name	Ebene
	1991 OK 134, 825 P.2d 1305, 63 OBJ 13,	State ex rel. Henry v. Southwestern Bell Telephone Co.	Discussed
	1992 OK 134, 848 P.2d 1142, 63 OBJ 2793,	Denney v. Scott	Cited
	1969 OK 20, 452 P.2d 777,	SEBRING v. CAPORAL	Cited
	2007 OK 78, 171 P.3d 899,	ARKANSAS VALLEY STATE BANK v. PHILLIPS	Cited
	2011 OK 89, 264 P.3d 1251,	THOMPSON v. STATE ex rel. BD. OF TRUSTEES OF OKLA. PUBLIC EMPLOYEES RETIREMENT SYSTEM	Cited
	2013 OK 14, 297 P.3d 378,	STATE ex rel. BOARD OF REGENTS OF THE UNIVERSITY OF OKLAHOMA v. LUCAS	Cited
	2013 OK 29, 343 P.3d 1266,	ARBUCKLE SIMPSON AQUIFER PROTECTION FEDERATION OF OKLA., INC. v. OKLA. WATER RESOURCES BD.	Discussed
	1976 OK 132, 555 P.2d 1016,	LOWREY v. HODGES	Cited
	2021 OK 31, 489 P.3d 36,	STATE ex rel. OKLA. STATE BD. OF MEDICAL LICENSURE AND SUPERVISION v. RIVERO	Cited
	2000 OK 45, 10 P.3d 198, 71 OBJ 1594,	Davuluri v. State ex. rel. Oklahoma Bd. Of Med. Licensure & Supervision	Cited
	2023 OK 96, 536 P.3d 939,	LEO v. OKLAHOMA WATER RESOURCES BOARD	Cited
	1982 OK 124, 653 P.2d 209,	Teleco, Inc. v. Corporation Com'n	Cited
	1983 OK 30, 661 P.2d 892,	Wood v. Independent School Dist. No. 141 of Pottawatomie County	Cited
	1984 OK 7, 687 P.2d 106,	Callison v. Callison	Cited
Title 59. Professions and Occupations
	Cite	Name	Ebene
	59 O.S. 1474,	Penalties	Cited

Citationizer: Table of Authority

---

Cite	Name	Ebene
Title 12. Civil Procedure
	Cite	Name	Ebene
	12 O.S. 2615,	Exclusion of Witnesses	Cited