10-001679 Epic Hotel, Llc vs. Department Of Revenue
 Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Monday, August 2, 2010.


View Dockets  
Summary: DOR Final Order in Angler Resorts v. Dept of Revenue, Case No. DOR-08-17 -FOI (Fl. DOR, 3/16/08) required DOR accept statements about employees in Enterprise Zone sales tax refund application once Enterprise Zone Coordinator certified the application.

1STATE OF FLORIDA

4DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

8EPIC HOTEL, LLC, )

12)

13Petitioner, )

15)

16vs. ) Case No. 10-1679

21)

22DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, )

26)

27Respondent. )

29)

30RECOMMENDED ORDER

32Administrative Law Judge John D. C. Newton, II, of the

42Division of Administrative Hearings (Division), conducted the

49final hearing in this cause on June 1, 2010, by video

60teleconference with sites in Miami and Tallahassee, Florida.

68APPEARANCES

69For Petitioner: Herbert Friesner, Esquire

74Economic Development Consultants, Inc.

7814361 Commerce Way, Suite 205

83Miami Lakes, Florida 33016

87For Respondent: Carrol Y. Cherry, Esquire

93Office of the Attorney General

98Revenue Litigation Bureau

101The Capitol, Plaza Level 01

106Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1050

109STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

113Is the taxpayer, Epic Hotel, LLC, entitled to a refund of

124$10,000 of sales tax paid for building materials that were used

136for the rehabilitation of real property located in an enterprise

146zone, on the basis that 20 percent of its permanent, full-time

157employees are residents of the Enterprise Zone?

164PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

166Florida offers a sales tax exemption, provided through a

175refund process, for sales taxes paid on building materials used

185to rehabilitate real property located in an “Enterprise Zone.”

194This case is about a dispute over the amount of sales tax refund

207to which Epic Hotel, LLC (Epic) is entitled. The Department of

218Revenue (Department) denied Epic’s refund claim for sales tax in

228the sum of $10,000. Epic requested a formal hearing to contest

240the refund denial. The Department of Revenue approved $5,000 of

251the refund claim based on information obtained during the course

261of the dispute. The sole remaining issue is whether Epic has

272sufficiently established that 20 percent of its permanent, full-

281time employees reside inside the Enterprise Zone entitling Epic

290to the tax exemption and an additional $5,000 refund.

300The parties did not submit a joint pre-hearing statement.

309The Department filed a unilateral pre-hearing statement. Epic

317did not file a pre-hearing statement.

323At the hearing, Epic called no witnesses. It offered two

333exhibits into evidence. Both exhibits were admitted.

340The Department of Revenue called two witnesses and admitted

349six exhibits into evidence. The witnesses were John Shettle,

358Tax Auditor II for the Department, and Andrea Nicole Hunter, Tax

369Audit Supervisor.

371Epic made a closing argument. The Department did not. The

381parties were given an opportunity to submit proposed recommended

390orders. The Department filed a Proposed Recommended Order.

398Epic filed a Waiver of Right to File a Proposed Recommended

409Order. Testimony, exhibits, and rulings are reported in the

418transcript of the formal hearing filed with the Division on

428June 18, 2010.

431FINDINGS OF FACT

4341. The Department is an agency of the State of Florida and

446is authorized to administer the tax laws of the State of

457Florida.

4582. In 2008 Epic constructed and began operation of a hotel

469in a State of Florida Enterprise Zone in Miami-Dade County,

479Florida.

4803. Epic sought a refund of sales tax paid on building

491materials for the construction of the hotel.

4984. The sales tax paid on building materials used in the

509rehabilitation of real property located in an Enterprise Zone

518may be exempt up to $10,000, upon a showing that the items have

532been used for the rehabilitation of real property located in an

543Enterprise Zone and that 20 percent or more of the taxpayer’s

554fulltime, permanent employees reside in the Enterprise Zone.

5625. On or about August 24, 2009, Epic filed an Application

573for Refund–Sales and Use Tax. It requested refund of $10,000 in

585sales tax for building materials used to build the hotel.

5956. It submitted a completed Department form DR-26S and

604other documents, including a completed Department form EZ-M.

6127. The form EZ-M is the Department’s “Application for

621Eligibility” for the Florida Enterprise Zone Program Building

629Materials Sales Tax Refund. The form included a completed

638Section I identifying permanent, full-time employees Epic

645represented reside in the Enterprise Zone. The form represented

654that 22 percent of Epic’s full-time, permanent employees reside

663in the Enterprise Zone.

6678. The Enterprise Zone Coordinator for the area signed the

677EZ-M certifying, “that I have examined the statements contained

686on this application certificate, and to the best of my knowledge

697and belief they are true, correct and complete.” The record

707does not indicate whether the Enterprise Zone Coordinator is an

717employee of the Department.

7219. John Shettle, Tax Auditor for the Department, audited

730Epic’s refund application.

73310. Mr. Shettle is responsible for auditing refund

741applications. His duties include verifying that refund

748applications are complete and accurate, and that the applicant

757has provided the documentation required by the refund statute.

76611. The Department issued Epic a Notice of Intent to Make

777Refund Claim Changes, Form DR-1200R (for Refund Number

785R09246069). It proposed to deny the refund claim for $10,000.

79612. The Notice asked Epic to provide additional

804documentation aimed at establishing that Epic owned the property

813where the hotel was located and that the individuals identified

823in Section I to the form EZ-M were full-time, permanent

833employees of Epic. The requested documents included a copy of

843Epic’s 940 Federal Unemployment Tax Return and a copy of Epic’s

854W3 form.

85613. Mr. Shettle conducted independent research on the

864employee issue. He used the State’s unemployment tax records

873and the Department of Business and Professional Regulation’s

881employee leasing company registration data. He was unable to

890locate any evidence that the employees listed in Schedule A were

901employed by Epic. Epic has not presented any.

90914. Epic has a Hotel Operating Agreement with Kimpton

918Hotel & Restaurant Group, LLC. The Agreement provides for

927Kimpton to “supervise, direct, and control the management,

935operation, and promotion of the Epic hotel.”

94215. The employees identified as Epic employees on

950Section I of Epic’s EZ-M form are employees of Kimpton who

961provide the contracted services at Epic. They are not direct

971employees of Epic or employees leased by Epic.

97916. Epic relied upon the Final Order of the Department of

990Revenue in The Angler Resorts, LLC v. State of Florida,

1000Department of Revenue , Case No. DOR-08-17-FOI (Fla. Dept. of

1009Rev., March 16, 2008), in its dealings with the Department. In

1020reliance upon that Final Order, Epic maintained that it was not

1031required to provide anything more than the certified form EZ-M

1041and a completed Department form DR-26S.

104717. The Department denied Epic’s refund application on the

1056basis that Epic could not be verified as the owner, lessee, or

1068lessor of the rehabilitated parcel, and that the individuals

1077listed in Section I could not be confirmed as employees of Epic.

108918. During the course of this dispute about entitlement to

1099the refund, Epic established ownership of the property at the

1109time of the application. The Department consequently issued

1117Epic a refund of $5,000.

112319. The Department has adopted rules governing the manner

1132and form of refund applications.

1137CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

114020. The Division has jurisdiction over this matter.

1148§ 120.57, Fla. Stat. (2009).

115321. Section 212.08(5)(g), Florida Statutes (2009), creates

1160a sales tax exemption for building materials used in the

1170rehabilitation of real property located in an enterprise zone.

1179The refund may be up to $10,000 if at least 20 percent of the

1194taxpayer’s full-time, permanent employees reside in the

1201Enterprise Zone. It is the statute that provides for the sales

1212tax refund that Epic seeks. Section 212.08(5)(g) provides:

1220(g) Building materials used in the

1226rehabilitation of real property located in

1232an enterprise zone.

12351. Building materials used in the

1241rehabilitation of real property located in

1247an enterprise zone are exempt from the tax

1255imposed by this chapter upon an affirmative

1262showing to the satisfaction of the

1268department that the items have been used for

1276the rehabilitation of real property located

1282in an enterprise zone. Except as provided

1289in subparagraph 2, this exemption inures to

1296the owner, lessee, or lessor at the time the

1305real property is rehabilitated, but only

1311through a refund of previously paid taxes.

1318To receive a refund pursuant to this

1325paragraph, the owner, lessee, or lessor of

1332the rehabilitated real property must file an

1339application under oath with the governing

1345body or enterprise zone development agency

1351having jurisdiction over the enterprise zone

1357where the business is located, as

1363applicable. A single application for a

1369refund may be submitted for multiple,

1375contiguous parcels that were part of a

1382single parcel that was divided as part of

1390the rehabilitation of the property. All

1396other requirements of this paragraph apply

1402to each parcel on an individual basis. The

1410application must include:

1413a. The name and address of the person

1421claiming the refund.

1424b. An address and assessment roll parcel

1431number of the rehabilitated real property

1437for which a refund of previously paid taxes

1445is being sought.

1448c. A description of the improvements made

1455to accomplish the rehabilitation of the real

1462property.

1463d. A copy of a valid building permit issued

1472by the county or municipal building

1478department for the rehabilitation of the

1484real property.

1486e. A sworn statement, under penalty of

1493perjury, from the general contractor

1498licensed in this state with whom the

1505applicant contracted to make the

1510improvements necessary to rehabilitate the

1515real property, which lists the building

1521materials used to rehabilitate the real

1527property, the actual cost of the building

1534materials, and the amount of sales tax paid

1542in this state on the building materials. If

1550a general contractor was not used, the

1557applicant, not a general contractor, shall

1563make the sworn statement required by this

1570sub-subparagraph. Copies of the invoices

1575that evidence the purchase of the building

1582materials used in the rehabilitation and the

1589payment of sales tax on the building

1596materials must be attached to the sworn

1603statement provided by the general contractor

1609or by the applicant. Unless the actual cost

1617of building materials used in the

1623rehabilitation of real property and the

1629payment of sales taxes is documented by a

1637general contractor or by the applicant in

1644this manner, the cost of the building

1651materials is deemed to be an amount equal to

166040 percent of the increase in assessed value

1668for ad valorem tax purposes.

1673f. The identifying number assigned pursuant

1679to s. 290.0065 to the enterprise zone in

1687which the rehabilitated real property is

1693located.

1694g. A certification by the local building

1701code inspector that the improvements

1706necessary to rehabilitate the real property

1712are substantially completed.

1715h. A statement of whether the business is a

1724small business as defined by s. 288.703(1).

1731i. If applicable, the name and address of

1739each permanent employee of the business,

1745including, for each employee who is a

1752resident of an enterprise zone, the

1758identifying number assigned pursuant to

1763s. 290.0065 to the enterprise zone in which

1771the employee resides.

17742. This exemption inures to a municipality,

1781county, other governmental unit or agency,

1787or nonprofit community-based organization

1791through a refund of previously paid taxes if

1799the building materials used in the

1805rehabilitation are paid for from the funds

1812of a community development block grant,

1818State Housing Initiatives Partnership

1822Program, or similar grant or loan program.

1829To receive a refund, a municipality, county,

1836other governmental unit or agency, or

1842nonprofit community-based organization must

1846file an application that includes the same

1853information required in subparagraph 1. In

1859addition, the application must include a

1865sworn statement signed by the chief

1871executive officer of the municipality,

1876county, other governmental unit or agency,

1882or nonprofit community-based organization

1886seeking a refund which states that the

1893building materials for which a refund is

1900sought were funded by a community

1906development block grant, State Housing

1911Initiatives Partnership Program, or similar

1916grant or loan program.

19203. Within 10 working days after receipt of

1928an application, the governing body or

1934enterprise zone development agency shall

1939review the application to determine if it

1946contains all the information required by

1952subparagraph 1, or subparagraph 2, and meets

1959the criteria set out in this paragraph. The

1967governing body or agency shall certify all

1974applications that contain the required

1979information and are eligible to receive a

1986refund. If applicable, the governing body

1992or agency shall also certify if 20 percent

2000of the employees of the business are

2007residents of an enterprise zone, excluding

2013temporary and part-time employees. The

2018certification must be in writing, and a copy

2026of the certification shall be transmitted to

2033the executive director of the Department of

2040Revenue. The applicant is responsible for

2046forwarding a certified application to the

2052department within the time specified in

2058subparagraph 4.

20604. An application for a refund must be

2068submitted to the department within 6 months

2075after the rehabilitation of the property is

2082deemed to be substantially completed by

2088the local building code inspector or by

2095November 1 after the rehabilitated property

2101is first subject to assessment.

21065. Only one exemption through a refund of

2114previously paid taxes for the rehabilitation

2120of real property is permitted for any single

2128parcel of property unless there is a change

2136in ownership, a new lessor, or a new lessee

2145of the real property. A refund may not be

2154granted unless the amount to be refunded

2161exceeds $500. A refund may not exceed the

2169lesser of 97 percent of the Florida sales or

2178use tax paid on the cost of the building

2187materials used in the rehabilitation of the

2194real property as determined pursuant to sub-

2201subparagraph 1.e. or $ 5,000, or, if at

2210least 20 percent of the employees of the

2218business are residents of an enterprise

2224zone, excluding temporary and part-time

2229employees, the amount of refund may not

2236exceed the lesser of 97 percent of the sales

2245tax paid on the cost of the building

2253materials or $10,000. A refund shall be

2261made within 30 days after formal approval by

2269the department of the application for the

2276refund.

22776. The department shall adopt rules

2283governing the manner and form of refund

2290applications and may establish guidelines as

2296to the requisites for an affirmative showing

2303of qualification for exemption under this

2309paragraph.

23107. The department shall deduct an amount

2317equal to 10 percent of each refund granted

2325under the provisions of this paragraph from

2332the amount transferred into the Local

2338Government Half-cent Sales Tax Clearing

2343Trust Fund pursuant to s. 212.20 for the

2351county area in which the rehabilitated real

2358property is located and shall transfer that

2365amount to the General Revenue Fund.

23718. For the purposes of the exemption

2378provided in this paragraph, the term:

2384a. “Building materials” means tangible

2389personal property which becomes a component

2395part of improvements to real property.

2401b. “Real property” has the same meaning as

2409provided in s. 192.001(12).

2413c. “Rehabilitation of real property” means

2419the reconstruction, renovation, restoration,

2423rehabilitation, construction, or expansion

2427of improvements to real property.

2432d. “Substantially completed” has the same

2438meaning as provided in s. 192.042(1).

24449. This paragraph expires on the date

2451specified in s. 290.016 for the expiration

2458of the Florida Enterprise Zone Act.

246422. The issue in this case is whether Epic is entitled to

2476the $10,000 refund allowed when at least 20 percent of the

2488employees of the refund applicant are residents of the

2497Enterprise Zone.

249923. The Department has adopted rules to implement the

2508refund statute. They are Florida Administrative Code

2515Rules 12A-1.107 and 12A-1.097. The Department interpreted and

2523applied those rules in the Final Order of the Department of

2534Revenue in The Angler Resorts, LLC v. State of Florida,

2544Department of Revenue , Case No. DOR-08-17-FOI (Fla. Dept. of

2553Rev., March 16, 2008) ( Angler Resorts ). The Angler Resorts

2564Final Order holds that Forms EZ-E and DR-26S incorporated by

2574Department rule do not authorize the Department to require

2583exemption applicants whose Application for Eligibility have been

2591certified by Enterprise Zone Coordinator to provide additional

2599information supporting the statements about the number or

2607residence of employees.

261024. Although Angler Resorts involved Section 212.08(5)(h),

2617Florida Statutes (2008), it is relevant here because the

2626provisions of subsections (g) and (h) involving the percentage

2635of employees residing in the enterprise zone are the same. Also

2646the employment and certification portions of the form EZ-M in

2656this case are the same as those in Form EZ-E interpreted and

2668applied in Angler Resorts . Compare Department Exhibit 3 to Form

2679EZ-E found at http://www.floridaenterprisezone.com/

2683Zones/Org1/uploads/BEREFUNDrevised-09-2008.DOC. Likewise the

2686Form DR-26S is the same. Compare Department Exhibit 1 to Form

2697Dr-26S found at

2700http://dor.myflorida.com/dor/forms/2008/dr26s.pdf .

270225. Application of Angler Resorts results in the

2710conclusion that Epic did not have to provide further information

2720about the residence and number of employees as certified by the

2731Enterprise Zone coordinator. This is true even though Epic did

2741not establish the individuals were Epic employees. In fact the

2751evidence establishes that they are not Epic employees. But

2760Angler Resorts holds that once the Application for Eligibility

2769has been certified by the Enterprise Zone Coordinator, further

2778information about the employer and employees may not be required

2788or considered.

279026. The similarity of the rules and forms involves requires

2800application of Angler Resorts . The reasoning of the Department

2810in Conclusion of Law 14 of Angler Resorts about Section

2820212.08(5)(h), Florida Statutes, and Form EZ-E cannot be

2828reasonably rejected in interpreting Sections 212.08(5)(g),

2834Florida Statutes, and Form EZ-M when the same Department is

2844applying identical provisions of its rules and forms. In

2853Conclusion of Law 14 the Department stated:

2860Section 212.08(5)(h)6, Florida Statutes

2864permits the Respondent [Department] to

2869establish guidelines as to what is necessary

2876to show qualification for the exemption.

2882Respondent has provided guidelines in

2887Forms EZ-E and DR-26S, incorporated by rule

2894in compliance with Chapter 120, F.S. These

2901guidelines do not include the information

2907requested by the Notice of Intent to Make

2915Tax Refund Claims changes for that refund.

2922Given the specific nature of the

2928certification process provided in Section

2933212.08(5)(h), Florida Statutes, and the

2938permissive nature of the grant of authority

2945to establish the guidelines for the

2951requisites for a necessary showing of

2957qualification for the exemption, the

2962information requested in the Attachment to

2968Respondent’s Notice of Intent to Make Tax

2975Refund Claim Changes . . . falls outside

2983that required by the implemented statute or

2990rule (which includes Forms EZ-E and DR-26S,

2997incorporated by reference in Respondent’s

3002rules). Accordingly, Petitioner’s claims

3006for refund in excess of $5000 should not

3014have been denied on the basis of failure to

3023produce the requested information.

3027Additional documentary requirements should

3031be subject to the rulemaking process

3037governed by Section 120.54, Florida

3042Statutes.

304327. The Department maintains that Angler Resorts should

3051not be applied in this case. It argues that following the

3062Department’s Final Order in Angler Resorts would impermissibly

3070infringe on the Department’s authority. The law is to the

3080contrary.

308128. An agency has authority to interpret the statutes over

3091which it has substantive jurisdiction, as well as its own rules.

3102L.B. Bryan & Co. v. School Bd. , 746 So. 2d 1194 (Fla. 1st DCA

31161999). The agency’s interpretation is entitled to due

3124deference. See Florida Wildlife Federation v. Collier County ,

3132819 So. 2d 200 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); D.A.B. Constructors, Inc. v.

3144State, Dep’t of Transportation , 656 So. 2d 940 (Fla. 1st DCA

31551995); Florida Hospital Association, Inc. v. Health Care Cost

3164Containment Board , 593 So. 2d 1137 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). The

3175agency’s interpretation does not have to be the only or the best

3187interpretation.

318829. The interpretation in Angler Resorts is not the only

3198or the best interpretation. But the Final Order in Angler

3208Resorts is the Department’s interpretation and application of a

3217statute it is charged with administering and of rules and forms

3228that it adopted. It is a Final Order, not argument in a

3240proceeding where the Department is merely a litigant. It

3249applies here.

325130. The Department has the power to amend the rules, as it

3263noted in Angler Resorts in March, 2008. It has not done so,

3275although the Department appears to have begun the process. The

3285Department noticed development of rule amendments to Florida

3293Administrative Code Rule 12A-1.107(3), Notice of Development of

3301Rule Making, Florida Administrative Weekly , November 6, 2009,

3309Vol. 35, p. 44.

3313RECOMMENDATION

3314Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

3324Law, it is Recommended that the Department of Revenue grant

3334Epic’s refund application and approve a sales tax refund for the

3345total amount of $10,000.

3350DONE AND ENTERED this 2nd day of August, 2010, in

3360Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

3364S

3365JOHN D. C. NEWTON, II

3370Administrative Law Judge

3373Division of Administrative Hearings

3377The DeSoto Building

33801230 Apalachee Parkway

3383Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060

3386(850) 488-9675

3388Fax Filing (850) 921-6847

3392www.doah.state.fl.us

3393Filed with the Clerk of the

3399Division of Administrative Hearings

3403this 2nd day of August, 2010.

3409COPIES FURNISHED :

3412Marshall Stranburg, General Counsel

3416Department of Revenue

3419The Carlton Building, Room 204

3424501 South Calhoun Street

3428Tallahassee, Florida 32314-6668

3431Carrol Y. Cherry, Esquire

3435Office of the Attorney General

3440Revenue Litigation Bureau

3443The Capitol, Plaza Level 01

3448Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1050

3451Herb Friesner

3453Economic Development Consultants, Inc.

345714361 Commerce Way, Suite 205

3462Miami Lakes, Florida 33016

3466Lisa Echeverri, Executive Director

3470Department of Revenue

3473The Carlton Building, Room 104

3478501 South Calhoun Street

3482Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0100

3485NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

3491All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within

350115 days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions

3512to this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that

3523will issue the Final Order in this case.

Select the PDF icon to view the document.
PDF
Date
Proceedings
PDF:
Date: 01/13/2011
Proceedings: (Agency) Final Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/13/2011
Proceedings: Respondent' Exceptions to Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/10/2011
Proceedings: Agency Final Order
PDF:
Date: 08/02/2010
Proceedings: Recommended Order
PDF:
Date: 08/02/2010
Proceedings: Recommended Order (hearing held June 1, 2010). CASE CLOSED.
PDF:
Date: 08/02/2010
Proceedings: Recommended Order cover letter identifying the hearing record referred to the Agency.
PDF:
Date: 07/19/2010
Proceedings: Respondent's Proposed Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/25/2010
Proceedings: Order Granting Extension of Time (proposed recommended orders to be filed by July 19, 2010).
PDF:
Date: 06/24/2010
Proceedings: Respondent's Request for Extension of Time to File Proposed Recommended Order filed.
Date: 06/18/2010
Proceedings: Transcript of Proceedings filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/08/2010
Proceedings: Petitioners Epic Hotel, LLC. Waiver of Right to File a Proposed Final Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/01/2010
Proceedings: Petitioner's Response to Respondent's First Set of Written Interrogatories filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/01/2010
Proceedings: Petitioner's Response to Request for Admission filed.
Date: 06/01/2010
Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
PDF:
Date: 05/27/2010
Proceedings: Respondent's Pre-hearing Statement filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/25/2010
Proceedings: Respondent's Witness and Exhibits List (exhibits not available for viewing) filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/20/2010
Proceedings: Order Requiring Disclosure of Objections to Data Summaries.
PDF:
Date: 04/13/2010
Proceedings: Respondent's Notice of Intent to Introduce into Evidence Records Containing Data Summaries filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/13/2010
Proceedings: Respondent's First Request for Production of Documents filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/13/2010
Proceedings: Respondent's First Requests for Admission filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/13/2010
Proceedings: Notice of Serving Respondent's First Set of Written Interrogatories filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/07/2010
Proceedings: Order Directing Filing of Exhibits
PDF:
Date: 04/07/2010
Proceedings: Order of Pre-hearing Instructions.
PDF:
Date: 04/07/2010
Proceedings: Notice of Hearing by Video Teleconference (hearing set for June 1, 2010; 9:00 a.m.; Miami and Tallahassee, FL).
PDF:
Date: 03/29/2010
Proceedings: Initial Order.
PDF:
Date: 03/29/2010
Proceedings: Notice of Appearance filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/26/2010
Proceedings: Order Termination Proceeding and Referring to the Division of Administrative Hearings filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/26/2010
Proceedings: Order Scheduling Hearing on Respondent`s Motion to Transfer for Factual Determination filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/26/2010
Proceedings: Response to Motion to Transfer and Request to Set Hearing on Said Motion and if Motion is Denied to Proceed with Main Case, We Further Request Costs and Attorney`s Fees on this Matter filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/26/2010
Proceedings: Motion to Transfer for Factual Determination filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/26/2010
Proceedings: Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/26/2010
Proceedings: Petition for Administrative Hearing filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/26/2010
Proceedings: Agency referral filed.

Case Information

Judge:
JOHN D. C. NEWTON, II
Date Filed:
03/26/2010
Date Assignment:
03/29/2010
Last Docket Entry:
01/13/2011
Location:
Miami, Florida
District:
Southern
Agency:
ADOPTED IN TOTO
 

Counsels

Related DOAH Cases(s) (1):

Related Florida Statute(s) (9):

Related Florida Rule(s) (2):