Section 1519(C) of the The Vehicle Code - Interpretation
In Reynolds this Court explained how the burden shifts between the parties:
We construe Section 1519(c) of the the Vehicle Code, 75 Pa.C.S. 1519(c), as providing that Department of Corrections's (DOC) burden at a de novo hearing, to prove that the driver suffered from a medical condition on the date of recall that rendered him incompetent to drive, may be satisfied by the introduction of the medical report which DOT relied upon in recalling the driver's license.
This would establish DOT's prima facie case and would shift the burden of going forward with the evidence to the licensee.
If the licensee presents evidence at the hearing that he was, in fact, competent to drive on the date of recall, or that he has become competent to drive since the time that his license was recalled and the date of the hearing, then, naturally, DOT would most likely need to present testimonial evidence in order to prove incompetency.
The burden of persuasion never leaves DOT, but the medical report itself is sufficient to meet and overcome DOT's initial burden to establish a prima facie case. Id., 694 A.2d at 364.