Barnes, J.
Regardless of whether the applicable statutory requirements were met here, it is clear that the September 13, 2011 hearing did not satisfy the very minimum due process requirements—namely that a judge, or someone so authorized, preside over the hearing. In fact, this hearing was conducted by the court reporter. This violated Reynolds’s right to a neutral decision-maker. Further, no witnesses were sworn, no evidence was heard, and Reynolds was not given the opportunity to defend against the ejectment. Reynolds was then presented with a pre-signed order requiring her to vacate the premises. This violated her right to present a defense.
….
Conclusion
Because the manner in which the hearing was conducted denied Reynolds due process, we reverse.
Reversed.
FRIEDLANDER, J., and MAY, J., concur.