Questions of Fact. Except as otherwise provided in this Agreement, any dispute concerning a question of fact arising under this Agreement which is not disposed of by agreement shall be decided by the Chief Engineer of the Department of Transportation. The decision of the Chief Engineer will be final and conclusive unless, within 30 calendar days after the date of receipt of a copy of such written decision, Local Agency mails or otherwise furnishes to the State a written appeal addressed to the Executive Director of CDOT. In connection with any appeal proceeding under this clause, Local Agency shall be afforded an opportunity to be heard and to offer evidence in support of its appeal. Pending final decision of a dispute hereunder, Local Agency shall proceed diligently with the performance of this Agreement in accordance with the Chief Engineer’s decision. The decision of the Executive Director or his duly authorized representative for the determination of such appeals shall be final and conclusive and serve as final agency action. This dispute clause does not preclude consideration of questions of law in connection with decisions provided for herein. Nothing in this Agreement, however, shall be construed as making final the decision of any administrative official, representative, or board on a question of law.
Questions of Fact. A. Any question of fact in with this work not disposed of by agreement between parties shall be referred to the Program Manager, Office of Air, Rail and Transit, South Dakota Department of Transportation, for determination. His decision shall be final and conclusive to the parties of this AGREEMENT.
Questions of Fact. Any question of fact in connection with work not disposed of by agreement between the parties will be referred to the DEPARTMENT’S Secretary for determination, whose decision will be final and conclusive to the parties of this Agreement.
Questions of Fact. Any question of fact in connection with this work not disposed of by agreement between the parties shall be referred to the City of Tea for determination. This determination, after consultation with SDDOT, MPO, and FHWA, shall be final and conclusive to the parties of the agreement.
Questions of Fact. “[T]he standard for reviewing a military judge’s decision to accept a plea of guilty is an abuse of discretion.” The court added, “A military judge abuses his discretion if he accepts a guilty plea without an adequate factual basis to support the plea.” 1 CAAF seemingly departed from prior caselaw and provided the following explanation regarding the substantial basis test, which now expressly requires either a substantial basis in law or a substantial basis in fact for questioning the providence of a guilty plea: Does the record as a whole show “‘a substantial basis’ in law and fact for questioning the guilty plea.” United States x. Xxxxxx, 32 X.X. 433, 436 (C.M.A. 1991). Traditionally, this test is presented in the conjunctive (i.e., law and fact) . . . however, the test is better considered in the disjunctive (i.e., law or fact). That is because it is possible to have a factually supportable plea yet still have a substantial basis in law for questioning it.
