96-004845 Construction Industry Licensing Board vs. John A. Tagliaferro
 Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Monday, April 6, 1998.

View Dockets  
Summary: Contractor should be fined $4000 and have his license suspended until he satisfies the civil judgment against him.






20BOARD, )


23Petitioner, )

25) Case No. 96-4845

29vs. )




37Respondent. )



42Pursuant to notice, a formal hearing was held in this case

53on January 16, 1998, via video teleconference, with the parties

63appearing in Miami, Florida, before Patricia Hart Malono, a duly

73designated Administrative Law Judge of the Division of

81Administrative Hearings.


84For Petitioner: Ruby Seymour-Barr, Esquire

89Department of Business and

93Professional Regulation

951940 North Monroe Street, Suite 60

101Tallahassee, Florida 32399

104For Respondent: John A. Tagliaferro, pro se

111601 Northwest 103 Avenue, No. 357

117Pembroke Pines, Florida 33026-6023


125Whether the Respondent committed the acts alleged in the

134Administrative Complaint and, if so, the penalty which should be



147In a four-count Administrative Complaint dated June 25,

1551996, the Department of Business and Professional Regulation

163("Department") , charged, in Count I, that John A. Tagliaferro

174violated Section 489.129(1)(h)2., Florida Statutes (1995), by

181committing mismanagement or misconduct in the practice of

189contracting which caused financial harm to a customer; in Count

199II, that Mr. Tagliaferro violated Section 489.129(1)(k) by

207abandoning a construction project in which he was engaged as a

218contractor; in Count III, that Mr. Tagliaferro violated Section

227489.129(1)(n) by committing incompetency or misconduct in

234contracting; and, in Count IV, that Mr. Tagliaferro violated

243Section 489.129(1)(r) by failing to satisfy within a reasonable

252time a civil judgment against him and the business organization

262he qualified which relates to the practice of contracting.

271Mr. Tagliaferro timely requested a formal administrative hearing,

279and the Department forwarded the request to the Division of

289Administrative Hearings for assignment of an administrative law

297judge. After one continuance, the case was heard on January 16,


309The Department presented the testimony of Mirna Espina and

318Petitioner’s Exhibits A, B, C, E, and F were offered and received

330into evidence. Mr. Tagliaferro testified in his own behalf but

340offered no exhibits into evidence.

345A transcript was filed with the Division of Administrative

354Hearings on February 11, 1998, and the Department timely filed

364its proposed recommended order, which has been duly considered.


376Based on the oral and documentary evidence presented at the

386final hearing and on the entire record of this proceeding, the

397following findings of fact are made:

4031. The Department of Business and Professional Regulation

411is the state agency responsible for investigating and prosecuting

420complaints made to the Department for violations of Chapter 489,

430Part I, Florida Statutes. Sections 489.131(7)(e); 455.225,

437Florida Statutes. Pursuant to Section 489.129(1), the

444Construction Industry Licensing Board ("Board") is the entity

454responsible for imposing discipline for any of the violations set

464forth in that section.

4682. At the times material to this proceeding,

476Mr. Tagliaferro has been licensed by the Department as a

486certified building contractor, having been assigned license

493number CB C020944 by the Board. His license is currently

503suspended for failure to make payments pursuant to the terms of a

515stipulation adopted in a final order of the Board effective

525June 20, 1994.

5283. At all times material to this proceeding,

536Mr. Tagliaferro was the licensed qualifying agent for C. J.

546Construction Corporation.

5484. On or about May 15, 1994, Mr. Tagliaferro, d/b/a C. J.

560Construction Corporation, entered into a contract with

567Mr. Esteban Garcia to build a second-floor addition to

576Mr. Garcia's home located at 7541 Northwest 1st Court, Pembroke

586Pines, Florida.

5885. The contract specified that C. J. Construction

596Corporation would construct an area approximately 24' x 17', and

606the scope of the work included installing roof shingles to match

617the existing roof, new windows, a stairway to the new second-

628floor addition, a new entrance door, new electrical wiring for

638the second-floor addition, and new plywood flooring over the

647existing roof. No completion date was specified in the contract.

6576. The price stated in the contract for this construction

667was $17,000, with one-third of the price due on signing the

679contact and the remainder due as the job progressed. On May 16,

6911994, the date the contract was signed, Mr. Tagliaferro received

701payment of $5,000.

7057. The building plans were approved on or about August 11,

7161994, and Mr. Tagliaferro began construction immediately


7248. Payments were made to Mr. Tagliaferro by checks dated

734August 30, 1994, September 22, 1994, and October 21, 1994, in the

746amounts of $5,000, $3,000, and $2,000, respectively.

7569. Mr. Tagliaferro found that it was necessary to change

766the dimensions of the addition from 24' x 17' to 24' x 24' to

780accommodate the stairway to be built to the second floor. Had

791the addition been built to the original dimensions, the stairway

801would have covered a window. Mr. Tagliaferro prepared a written

811change order, with an estimate of $6500 to construct the addition

822to the increased specifications. Although the change order was

831never signed, Mr. Tagliaferro framed the addition at 24' x 24'.

84210. Mr. Tagliaferro installed the plywood flooring over the

851existing roof, framed the addition, installed the roof trusses,

860installed plywood sheeting on the exterior walls and roof,

869installed the new staircase, and tin-tagged the roof.

87711. Mr. Tagliaferro called for an inspection of the framing

887on October 27, 1994. The framing did not pass inspection because

898there was no approved copy of the plans on site, as required.

910Mr. Tagliaferro did not remove the plans from the site prior to

922the inspection.

92412. After the failed inspection on October 27, 1994, a

934member of Mr. Tagliaferro's family died, and it was necessary for

945him to go to New York, where he remained for three or four days.

959Mr. Tagliaferro telephoned Mr. Garcia's daughter, Mirna Espina,

967and told her that he was in New York to take care of personal


98213. When he returned, he contacted the architect to have

992another set of plans drawn up so he could re-submit them for

1004approval and continue construction.

100814. Ms. Espina telephoned Mr. Tagliaferro numerous times

1016after October 27 to ask when he intended to return to complete

1028the construction. She received no answer and left messages on

1038the answering machine. Mr. Tagliaferro did not return her calls.

104815. At some point after October 27, Ms. Espina went to the

1060police department and asked that a police officer accompany her

1070to Mr. Tagliaferro's house so she could talk to him and ask when

1083he intended to return to complete the construction.

1091Mr. Tagliaferro answered the door and, when the police officer

1101asked when he was going to finish the construction job, Mr.

1112Tagliaferro explained that he had a problem but intended to

1122return to complete the job. When the police officer told him to

1134tell the truth about whether he intended to complete the job,

1145Mr. Tagliaferro did not respond and closed his door. Mr. Garcia,

1156Ms. Espina, and her husband decided to complete the project

1166themselves in early-to-mid December 1994.

117116. Although he eventually obtained another set of plans,

1180Mr. Tagliaferro did not return to the Garcia house to complete

1191the addition. As of October 21, 1994, when he was last on the

1204job, Mr. Tagliaferro had not installed roof shingles, new

1213windows, an entrance door, wirelath or stucco on the exterior

1223walls, electrical wiring, sheet rock with popcorn ceiling, or

1232insulation, and he had not extended the air conditioning ductwork

1242to the new addition.

124617. A proposal for the installation of wirelath and stucco,

1256dated December 10, 1994, was prepared by Repairs Unlimited, Inc.,

1266and was accepted by Mr. Garcia. On January 11 and 30, 1995,

1278respectively, Mr. Garcia also accepted proposals from Miller

1286Roofing to install asphalt shingles on the roof and from Cayamas

1297Electric Corporation to do the electrical work in the addition.

1307Numerous receipts from building supply stores attest to the

1316materials purchased by Mr. Garcia to complete the project, and a

1327statement dated January 30, 1995, indicates that repair and

1336reinstallation work was performed for Mr. Garcia by Samuel Benson

1346on January 15, 22, and 29. These contracts total $5,421.00.

135718. Mr. Garcia hired an attorney on December 16, 1994, and

1368filed suit against Mr. Tagliaferro in circuit court. A hearing

1378was held, which Mr. Tagliaferro attended. On May 18, 1995, a

1389final judgment was entered against Mr. Tagliaferro directing him

1398to pay to Mr. Garcia and Ms. Espina $15,000 and costs of $250,

1412with interest accruing at the rate of eight percent per annum.

142319. Mr. Tagliaferro has not satisfied the judgment and has

1433not engaged in any discussions with Mr. Garcia or Ms. Espina to

1445arrange for payment of the judgment.

145120. The evidence presented by the Department is not

1460sufficient to support a finding of fact that Mr. Tagliaferro

1470abandoned the Garcia construction project. The only evidence

1478presented to support such a finding was the hearsay-within-

1487hearsay testimony of Ms. Espina that her father, Mr. Garcia, told

1498her that Mr. Tagliaferro told him that he did not intend to

1510complete the project. The evidence is sufficient, however, to

1519permit the inference that Mr. Tagliaferro was precluded from

1528completing work on the project prior to the expiration of ninety

1539days from October 21, 1994, when he last worked on the project.

155121. Although the evidence establishes that Mr. Garcia was

1560harmed financially by Mr. Tagliaferro's failure to complete the

1569addition, no evidence was presented by the Department to support

1579a finding of fact that Mr. Tagliaferro caused the financial harm

1590by mismanaging the construction project or by engaging in

1599misconduct. Specifically, the Department presented no evidence

1606to support its assertion that Mr. Tagliaferro completed only

1615thirty percent of the job before Mr. Garcia took over the

1626construction. Therefore, it failed to establish that the amount

1635paid to Mr. Tagliaferro exceeded the percentage of


164422. Additionally, the Department presented no evidence to

1652establish the relevant standards of competency in the practice of

1662contracting or the manner in which Mr. Tagliaferro failed to meet

1673those standards in the work done on the Garcia project.

168323. It is, however, uncontroverted that Mr. Tagliaferro has

1692not satisfied a judgment entered against him and C. J.

1702Construction Corporation in May 1995 in favor of Mr. Garcia and

1713Ms. Espina.


171824. The Division of Administrative hearings has

1725jurisdiction over the subject matter of this proceeding and of

1735the parties pursuant to Section 120.569(1), Florida Statutes


174425. In its Administrative Complaint, the Department seeks

1752penalties which include suspension or revocation of

1759Mr. Tagliaferro's license and/or the imposition of an

1767administrative fine. Therefore, it has the burden of proving by

1777clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Tagliaferro committed the

1786violations alleged in the Administrative Complaint. Department

1793of Banking and Finance, Division of Securities and Investor

1802Protection v. Osborne Stern and Co. , 670 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 1996);

1814Ferris v. Turlington , 510 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 1987).

182326. In Evans Packing Co. v. Department of Agriculture and

1833Consumer Services , 550 So. 2d 112, 116, n. 5 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989),

1846the court explained:

1849[C]lear and convincing evidence requires

1854that the evidence must be found to be

1862credible; the facts to which the witnesses

1869testify must be distinctly remembered; the

1875evidence must be precise and explicit and the

1883witnesses must be lacking in confusion as to

1891the facts in issue. The evidence must be of

1900such weight that it produces in the mind of

1909the trier of fact the firm belief of

1917conviction, without hesitancy, as to the

1923truth of the allegations sought to be

1930established. Slomowitz v. Walker , 429 So. 2d

1937797, 800 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983).

194327. Section 489.129(1), Florida Statutes, provides in

1950pertinent part:

1952(1) The board may take any of the following

1961actions against any certificateholder or

1966registrant: place on probation or reprimand

1972the licensee, revoke, suspend, or deny the

1979issuance or renewal of the certificate,

1985registration, or certificate of authority,

1990require financial restitution to a consumer

1996for financial harm directly related to a

2003violation of a provision of this part, impose

2011an administrative fine not to exceed $5,000

2019per violation, require continuing education,

2024or assess costs associated with investigation

2030and prosecution, if the contractor,

2035financially responsible officer, or business

2040organization for which the contractor is a

2047primary qualifying agent, a financially

2052responsible officer, or a secondary

2057qualifying agent responsible under s.

2062489.1195 is found guilty of any of the

2070following acts:


2073(h) Committing mismanagement or misconduct

2078in the practice of contracting that causes

2085financial harm to a customer. Financial

2091mismanagement or misconduct occurs when:


20972. The contractor has abandoned a customer's

2104job and the percentage of completion is less

2112than the percentage of the total contract

2119price paid to the contractor as of the time

2128of abandonment, unless the contractor is

2134entitled to retain such funds under the terms

2142of the contract or refunds the excess funds

2150within 30 days after the date the job is



2161(k) Abandoning a construction project in

2167which the contractor is engaged or under

2174contract as a contractor. A project may be

2182presumed abandoned after 90 days if the

2189contractor terminates the project without

2194just cause or without proper notification to

2201the owner, including the reason for

2207termination, or fails to perform work without

2214just cause for 90 consecutive days.


2221(n) Committing incompetency or misconduct in

2227the practice of contracting.


2232(r) Failing to satisfy within a reasonable

2239time, the terms of a civil judgment obtained

2247against the licensee, or the business

2253organization qualified by the licensee,

2258relating to the practice of the licensee's


226628. Rule 61G4-17.001(23), Florida Administrative Code,

2272provides that "[f]or purposes of Section 489.129(1)(r), F.S.,

"2280reasonable time" means ninety (90) days following the entry of a

2291civil judgment that is not appealed. The Board will consider a

2302mutually agreed upon payment plan as satisfaction of such a

2312judgment so long as the payments are current."

232029. Based on the findings of fact herein, the Department

2330has proven by clear and convincing evidence that Mr. Tagliaferro

2340is guilty of violating Section 489.129(1)(r).

234630. Pursuant to Rule 61G4-17.001(14)(b), "misconduct," as

2353that term is used in Section 489.129(1)(n), includes a violation

2363of any provision of Chapter 489, Part I, Florida Statutes.

2373Consequently, based on the findings of facts herein and the

2383conclusion of law that Mr. Tagliaferro is guilty of violating

2393Section 489.129(1)(r), the Department has proven by clear and

2402convincing evidence that Mr. Tagliaferro violated Section


241031. Based on the findings of fact herein, the Department

2420has failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that

2430Mr. Tagliaferro violated Section 489.129(1)(h)2. or Section

2437489.129(1)(k), and Counts I and II of the Administrative

2446Complaint should be dismissed.

245032. The range of penalties which may be imposed on

2460Mr. Tagliaferro for violating Sections 489.129(1)(n) and (r) are

2469set forth in Rule 61G4-17.001 as follows:

2476The following guidelines shall be used in

2483disciplinary cases, absent aggravating or

2488mitigating circumstances and subject to other

2494provisions of this Chapter.


2499(14) Misconduct or incompetency in the

2505practice of contracting as set forth in

2512Section 489.129(1)(n), Florida Statutes,

2516shall include, but is not limited to:


2524(b) Violation of any provision of Chapter

253161G4, Florida Administrative Code, or Chapter

2537489, Part I, F.S.


2542(d) The following guidelines shall apply to

2549cases involving misconduct or incompetency in

2555the practice of contracting, absent

2560aggravating or mitigating circumstances:


25652. Violation of any provision of Chapter

257261G4, Florida Administrative Code, or Chapter

2578489, Part I, F.S. First violation, $500 to

2586$1,000 fine; repeat violations $1,000 to

2594$5,000 fine and/or probation, suspension or



2603(18) Failure to satisfy a civil judgment

2610obtained against the licensee or the business

2617organization qualified by the licensee within

2623a reasonable time. First violation, $500 to

2630$1,000 fine and/or proof of satisfaction of

2638civil judgment; repeat violation, $1,000 to

2645$5,000 fine and/or proof of satisfaction of

2653civil judgment, probation, suspension or


265933. Rule 61G4-17.003 provides:

2663(1) As used in this rule, a repeat violation

2672is any violation on which disciplinary action

2679is being taken where the same licensee had

2687previously had disciplinary action taken

2692against him or received a letter of guidance

2700in a prior case; and said definition is to

2709apply regardless of whether the violations in

2716the present and prior disciplinary actions

2722are of the same or different subsections of

2730the disciplinary statutes.

2733(2) The penalty given in the above list [in

2742Rule 61G4-17.001] for repeat violations is

2748intended to apply only to situations where

2755the repeat violation is of a different

2762subsection of Chapter 489 than the first

2769violation. Where, on the other hand, the

2776repeat violation is the very same type of

2784violation as the first violation, the penalty

2791set out above will generally be increased

2798over what is otherwise shown for repeat

2805violations in the above list.

2810Based on the findings of facts herein, the Department has proven

2821that Mr. Tagliaferro has had disciplinary action taken against

2830him for previous violations of Chapter 489. Therefore, the

2839penalty ranges given in Rule 61G4-17.001 for repeat violations

2848should be used in determining the appropriate penalties in this


285934. In Section 489.129(1) and Rule 61G4-17.001(20), the

2867Board is authorized to assess the costs of investigation and

2877prosecution, in addition to the penalties imposed. The

2885Department presented no evidence to establish the amount of costs

2895at the formal hearing but, rather, cited Rule 61G4-12.018 in its

2906proposed recommended order to support its requests that such

2915costs be assessed and that the record be kept open for

2926presentation of the statement of costs to the Board. Rule 61G4-

293712.018 provides that "[t]he Department shall submit to the Board

2947an itemized listing of all costs related to investigation and

2957prosecution of an administrative complaint when said complaint is

2966brought before the Board for final agency action." There is

2976nothing in this rule to suggest that the fact-finding role of the

2988administrative law judge is transferred to the Board with regard

2998to the determination of the amount of the costs to be assessed.

3010Therefore, the assessment of such costs in this case is not

3021appropriate given the lack of proof of the amount claimed and the

3033corresponding inability of Mr. Tagliaferro to challenge the

3041Department's statement of costs.

304535. Rule 61G4-17.002, Florida Administrative Code, sets

3052forth the aggravating and mitigating circumstances which may be

3061considered for the purposes of mitigation or aggravation of

3070penalty. The rule provides that the factors

3077shall include, but are not limited to, the


3086(1) Monetary or other damage to the

3093licensee's customer, in any way associated

3099with the violation, which damage the licensee

3106has not relieved, as of the time the penalty

3115is to be assessed. (This provision shall not

3123be given effect to the extent it would

3131contravene federal bankruptcy law.)

3135(2) Actual job-site violations of building

3141codes, or conditions exhibiting gross

3146negligence, incompetence, or misconduct by

3151the licensee, which have not been corrected

3158as of the time the penalty is being assessed.

3167(3) The severity of the offense.

3173(4) The danger to the public.

3179(5) The number of repetitions of offenses.

3186(6) The number of complaints filed against

3193the licensee.

3195(7) The length of time the licensee has


3204(8) The actual damage, physical or

3210otherwise, to the licensee's customer.

3215(9) The deterrent effect of the penalty


3223(10) The effect of the penalty upon the

3231licensee's livelihood.

3233(11) Any efforts at rehabilitation.

3238(12) Any other mitigating or aggravating


324536. The penalty guidelines and aggravating and mitigating

3253factors have been evaluated in light of the facts found herein in

3265determining the recommended penalty.


3270Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

3280Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Construction Industry Licensing

3289Board enter a Final Order:

3294(1) Finding John A. Tagliaferro guilty of having violated

3303Section 489.129(1)(n) and Section 489.129(1)(r), Florida


3310(2) Dismissing Counts I and II of the Administrative


3320(3) Imposing an administrative fine of $4,000; and

3329(4) Suspending Mr. Tagliaferro's license as a building

3337contractor until he submits proof that he has satisfied the

3347judgment entered against him on May 18, 1995, in Case No.

335894-15660 (21), in the Circuit Court of the Seventeenth Judicial

3368Circuit, in and for Broward County, Florida.

3375DONE AND ENTERED this 6th day of April, 1998, in

3385Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.



3393Administrative Law Judge

3396Division of Administrative Hearings

3400The DeSoto Building

34031230 Apalachee Parkway

3406Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060

3409(850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675

3413Fax Filing (850) 921-6847

3417Filed with the Clerk of the

3423Division of Administrative Hearings

3427this 6th day of April, 1998.


3435Ruby Seymour-Barr, Esquire

3438Department of Business and

3442Professional Regulation

34441940 North Monroe Street, Suite 60

3450Tallahassee, Florida 32399

3453John A. Tagliaferro, pro se

3458601 Northwest 103 Avenue

3462No. 357

3464Pembroke Pines, Florida 33026-6023

3468Lynda L. Goodgame, General Counsel

3473Department of Business and

3477Professional Regulation

34791940 North Monroe Street

3483Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0792

3486Rodney Hurst, Executive Director

3490Construction Industry Licensing Board

34947960 Arlington Expressway, Suite 300

3499Jacksonville, Florida 32211-7467


3508All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within 15

3519days from the date of this recommended order. Any exceptions to

3530this recommended order should be filed with the agency that will

3541issue the final order in this case.

Select the PDF icon to view the document.
Date: 06/22/1998
Proceedings: Final Order filed.
Date: 06/16/1998
Proceedings: Agency Final Order
Date: 06/16/1998
Proceedings: Recommended Order
Date: 04/06/1998
Proceedings: Recommended Order sent out. CASE CLOSED. Hearing held 01/16/98.
Date: 02/23/1998
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Proposed Recommended Order filed.
Date: 02/11/1998
Proceedings: (2 Volumes) Transcript of Proceedings filed.
Date: 01/22/1998
Proceedings: Post-Hearing Order sent out.
Date: 01/16/1998
Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
Date: 01/14/1998
Proceedings: (Petitioner) Pre-Hearing Stipulation filed.
Date: 01/07/1998
Proceedings: Notice of Change of Hearing to Video Teleconference sent out. (Video Final Hearing set for 1/16/98; 9:30am; Ft. Lauderdale & Tallahassee)
Date: 09/10/1997
Proceedings: Order Vacating Abeyance and Rescheduling Hearing sent out. (hearing set for 1/16/98; 9:30am; Ft. Lauderdale)
Date: 09/02/1997
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Status Report filed.
Date: 08/13/1997
Proceedings: Order Denying Motion to Relinquish Jurisdiction and Requiring Status Report sent out. (status report due by 8/29/97)
Date: 07/09/1997
Proceedings: Letter to PHM from J. Tagliaffero Re: Judgment filed.
Date: 06/26/1997
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Motion to Relinquish Jurisdiction (filed via facsimile).
Date: 05/23/1997
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Status Report (filed via facsimile).
Date: 05/09/1997
Proceedings: Order Permitting Withdrawal of Counsel and Requiring Status Report sent out.
Date: 04/15/1997
Proceedings: (From E. Alsobrook) Motion to Withdraw as Attorney of Record filed.
Date: 03/31/1997
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Status Report (filed via facsimile).
Date: 03/19/1997
Proceedings: Order Holding Case in Abeyance sent out. (parties to file status report by 4/30/97)
Date: 03/12/1997
Proceedings: (Respondent) Notice of Change of Address; Respondent`s Response to Order to Show Cause w/cover letter filed.
Date: 03/12/1997
Proceedings: (Respondent) Notice of Change of Address; Respondent`s Response to Order to Show Cause filed.
Date: 02/25/1997
Proceedings: Order to Show Cause sent out.
Date: 12/05/1996
Proceedings: Order Granting Continuance and Cancelling Hearing sent out. (parties to file status report by 12/20/96)
Date: 11/27/1996
Proceedings: (Respondent) Motion for Continuance of Formal Hearing; Cover Letter filed.
Date: 11/27/1996
Proceedings: (Respondent) Notice of Serving Answers to Petitioner`s First Request for Admissions filed.
Date: 11/15/1996
Proceedings: Order Requiring Prehearing Stipulation sent out.
Date: 11/15/1996
Proceedings: Notice of Hearing sent out. (hearing set for 12/12/96; 9:00am; Ft. Lauderdale)
Date: 11/15/1996
Proceedings: Order sent out. (re: admissions)
Date: 10/28/1996
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Response to Initial Order (filed via facsimile).
Date: 10/21/1996
Proceedings: (Respondent) Request to Withdraw Admissions; Clever letter from E. Alsobrook filed.
Date: 10/17/1996
Proceedings: Initial Order issued.
Date: 10/14/1996
Proceedings: Agency referral letter; Administrative Complaint; Election of Rights filed.

Case Information

Date Filed:
Date Assignment:
Last Docket Entry:
Fort Lauderdale, Florida

Related DOAH Cases(s) (2):

Related Florida Statute(s) (4):

Related Florida Rule(s) (4):