97-000906 Construction Industry Licensing Board vs. James Randolph O?Brien
 Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Wednesday, July 16, 1997.

View Dockets  
Summary: Plumbing contractor, in his capacity as qualifying agent, is guilty of failing to honor warranty and to include license number on contract.






17Petitioner , )


20vs. ) Case No. 97-0906

25) 1



32Respondent. )



37Pursuant to notice, a Section 120.57(1) hearing was held in

47this case on June 11, 1997, by video teleconference at sites in

59Fort Lauderdale and Tallahassee, Florida, before Stuart M.

67Lerner, a duly designated Administrative Law Judge of the

76Division of Administrative Hearings.


81For Petitioner: Ruby Seymour-Barr, Senior Attorney

87Department of Business and

91Professional Regulation

931940 North Monroe Street

97Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0792

100For Respondent: No Appearance


1081. Whether Respondent committed the violations alleged in

116the Amended Administrative Complaint?

1202. If so, what punitive action should be taken against



133On November 13, 1995, the Department of Business and

142Professional Regulation (Department) issued a two-count Amended

149Administrative Complaint against Respondent. The Amended

155Administrative Compliant alleged that, in his capacity as the

164primary qualifying agent for a business organization, A'Aabbott

172Plumbing, Inc. ( A'Aabbott), which had entered into a written

182agreement with Nereo Agostinelli to install a drain field on

192Agostinelli's property, Respondent engaged in conduct, (in

199connection with that project) in violation of Section

207489.129(1)(n), Florida Statutes, (Count I) and Section

214489.119(5)(b), Florida Statutes, and therefore also Section

221489.129(1)(j), Florida Statutes, (Count II). On February 27,

2291997, the matter was referred to the Division of Administrative

239Hearings for the assignment of an Administrative Law Judge to

249conduct a Section 120.57(1) hearing on the allegations against


259The hearing was scheduled for June 11, 1997. The Department

269and Respondent were provided with written notice of the hearing

279in accordance with Section 120.569(2)(b), Florida Statutes. 2

287The Department appeared at the hearing, which was held as

297scheduled on June 11, 1997, through one of its Senior Attorney,

308Ruby Seymour-Barr, Esquire. Respondent did not make an

316appearance, either in person or through counsel or an authorized


327At the hearing, the Department presented the testimony of

336one witness, Nereo Agostinelli. It also offered into evidence

345nine exhibits (Petitioner's Exhibit's 2, 3, 9 through 13, 15, and

35616). All nine exhibits were received by the undersigned.

365At the conclusion of the evidentiary portion of the hearing,

375the undersigned, on the record, announced that proposed

383recommended orders had to be filed no later than ten days after

395the undersigned's receipt of the transcript of the hearing. The

405undersigned received the transcript of the hearing on June 27,

4151997. On July 8, 1997, the Department filed a proposed

425recommended order, which the undersigned has carefully

432considered. Accompanying the Department's proposed recommended

438order was an affidavit from Kelly Goodman, the custodian of the

449Department's Complaint Cost Summary Report records. 3 To date,

458Respondent has not filed any post-hearing submittal.


468Based upon the evidence adduced at hearing, and the record

478as a whole, the following Findings of Fact are made:

4881. Respondent is a plumbing contractor.

4942. He is now, and has been at all times material to the

507instant case, licensed to engage in the plumbing contracting

516business in the State of Florida.

5223. His license number is CF C020307.

5294. At all times material to the instant case, Respondent

539was the primary qualifying agent for A'Aabbott, a plumbing

548contracting business located in Fort Lauderdale, Florida.

5555. In August of 1992, A'Aabbott entered into a written

565contract (Contract) with Nereo Agostinelli in which it agreed,

574for $3,225.00, "[t]o furnish labor and materials to install [on

585Agostinelli's property in Plantation, Florida a] 600 sq. ft.

594drain field to all codes at standard practice." Respondent

603signed the Contract on behalf A'Aabbott. His license number,

612however, was not written or otherwise displayed on the Contract.

6226. The Contract contained the following warranty provision:

"6303 year conditional warranty-must upkeep interior plumbing."

6377. Agostinelli paid the $3,225.00 Contract price by check.

6478. A'Aabbott thereafter installed a 600 square foot drain

656field on Agostinelli's property, as it had agreed to do.

6669. Approximately two days after it had been installed

675(which was within the three-year warranty period), the system

684failed and raw sewage backed up into Agostinelli's residence on

694the property.

69610. The system failed because pipe that A'Aabbott had

705installed as part of the project had been cracked during

715installation by a large rock and had become clogged with soil and

727therefore could not carry effluent to the drain field.

73611. The "interior plumbing" that Agostinelli was required

744maintain as a prerequisite to his receiving the benefit of the

755Contract's "3 year conditional warranty" did not cause the

764failure of the system.

76812. Agostinelli made numerous attempts to contact A'Aabbott

776and request that it fix the problem, as A'Aabbott was required to

788do under the Contract.

79213. When Agostinelli spoke with Respondent, Respondent told

800him that A'Aabbott had no intention of doing anything further for


81214. Although A'Aabbott was made aware of the system's

821failure, it failed to take any action to repair the system.

83215. Sewage continued to back up into Agostinelli's

840residence. On three occasions, Agostinelli had Raider Rooter

848Sewer and Drain Cleaning, Inc., (Raider Rooter) come to his

858residence and remove sewage. The total cost to Agostinelli of

868Raider Rooter's services was $355.00. Agostinelli would not have

877incurred these costs had the system installed by A'Aabbott not


88816. Having been unsuccessful in his efforts to have

897A'Aabbott honor its warranty under the Contract, Agostinelli

905contracted with B and N Dozing and Bobcat Service (B and N), on

918or about March 23, 1993, to make the necessary repairs to the


93117. He paid B and N $670.00 to make these repairs.

94218. There have not been any problems with the system since

953it was repaired by B and N.


96319. The Department has been vested with the statutory

972authority to issue licenses to those qualified applicants seeking

981to engage in the plumbing contracting business in the State of

992Florida. Section 489.115, Florida Statutes.

99720. A business entity, like A'Aabbott, may obtain such a

1007license, but only through a licensed "qualifying agent." Section

1016489.119, Florida Statutes.

101921. There are two types of "qualifying agents": "primary

1029qualifying agents" and "secondary qualifying agents."

103522. A "primary qualifying agent" is defined in subsection

1044(4) of Section 489.105, Florida Statutes, as follows:

"1052Primary qualifying agent" means a person who

1059possesses the requisite skill, knowledge, and

1065experience, and has the responsibility to

1071supervise, direct, manage and control the

1077contracting activities of the business

1082organization with which he is connected; who

1089has the responsibility to supervise, direct,

1095manage, and control construction activities

1100on a job for which he has obtained the

1109building permit; and whose technical and

1115personal qualifications have been determined

1120by investigation and examination as provided

1126in this part, as attested by the

1133[D] epartment.

113523. A "secondary qualifying agent" is defined in subsection

1144(5) of Section 489.105, Florida Statutes, as follows:

"1152Secondary qualifying agent" means a person

1158who possesses the requisite skill, knowledge,

1164and experience, and has the responsibility to

1171supervise, direct, manage, and control

1176construction activities on a job for which he

1184has obtained a permit, and whose technical

1191and personal qualifications have been

1196determined by investigation and examination

1201as provided in this part, as attested by the

1210[D] epartment.

121224. The "responsibilities" of "qualifying agents" are

1219further described in Section 489.1195, Florida Statutes, which

1227provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

1233(1) A qualifying agent is a primary

1240qualifying agent unless he is a secondary

1247qualifying agent under this section.

1252(a) All primary qualifying agents for a

1259business organization are jointly and equally

1265responsible for supervision of all operations

1271of the business organization; for all field

1278work at all sites; and for financial matters,

1286both for the organization in general and for

1294each specific job. . . .

1300(3)(d) Any change in the status of a

1308qualifying agent is prospective only. A

1314qualifying agent is not responsible for his

1321predecessor's actions but is responsible,

1326even after a change in status, for matters

1334for which he was responsible while in a

1342particular status.

134425. The Construction Industry Licensing Board (Board) may

1352take any of the following punitive actions against a contractor

1362serving as the "primary qualifying agent" for a business entity

1372if (a) an administrative complaint is filed alleging that the

1382contractor or the business entity committed any of the acts

1392proscribed by Section 489.129(1), Florida Statutes, and (b) it is

1402shown that the allegations of the complaint are true: revoke or

1413suspend the contractor's license; place the contractor on

1421probation; reprimand the contractor; deny the renewal of the

1430contractor's license; impose an administrative fine not to exceed

1439$5,000.00 per violation; require financial restitution to the

1448victimized consumer(s); require the contractor to take continuing

1456education courses; or assess costs associated with the

1464Department's investigation and prosecution. Proof greater than a

1472mere preponderance of the evidence must be submitted. Clear and

1482convincing evidence is required. See Department of Banking and

1491Finance, Division of Securities and Investor Protection v.

1499Osborne Stern and Company , 670 So. 2d 932, 935 (Fla. 1996);

1510Ferris v. Turlington , 510 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 1987); McKinney v.

1521Castor , 667 So. 2d 387, 388 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Tenbroeck v.

1533Castor , 640 So. 2d 164, 167 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994); Nair v.

1545Department of Business and Professional Regulation , 654 So. 2d

1554205, 207 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Pic N' Save v. Department of

1566Business Regulation , 601 So. 2d 245 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Munch v.

1578Department of Professional Regulation , 592 So. 2d 1136 (Fla. 1st

1588DCA 1992); Newberry v. Florida Department of Law Enforcement , 585

1598So. 2d 500 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991); Pascale v. Department of

1609Insurance , 525 So. 2d 922 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Section

1619120.57(1)(h), Florida Statutes("[f] indings of fact shall be based

1629on a preponderance of the evidence, except in penal or licensure

1640disciplinary proceedings or except as otherwise provided by

1648statute"). "'[C] lear and convincing evidence requires that the

1658evidence must be found to be credible; the facts to which the

1670witnesses testify must be distinctly remembered; the testimony

1678must be precise and explicit and the witnesses must be lacking in

1690confusion as to the facts in issue. The evidence must be of such

1703weight that it produces in the mind of the trier of fact a firm

1717belief or conviction, without hesitancy, as to the truth of the

1728allegations sought to be established.'" In re Davey , 645 So. 2d

1739398, 404 (Fla. 1994), quoting, with approval, from Slomowitz v.

1749Walker , 429 So. 2d 797, 800 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). Furthermore,

1760the punitive action taken against the contractor may be based

1770only upon those offenses specifically alleged in the

1778administrative complaint. See Cottrill v. Department of

1785Insurance , 685 So. 2d 1371, 1372 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996); Kinney v.

1797Department of State , 501 So. 2d 129, 133 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987);

1809Hunter v. Department of Professional Regulation , 458 So. 2d 842,

1819844 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984).

182426. The Amended Administrative Complaint issued in the

1832instant case alleges that punitive action should be taken against

1842Respondent for violations of Section 489.129(1)(n), Florida

1849Statutes (Count I) and Section 489.119(5)(b), Florida Statutes,

1857and therefore also Section 489.129(1)(j), Florida Statutes (Count

1865II), which were committed in connection with a drain field

1875installation project that A'Aabbott undertook and completed for

1883Nereo Agostinelli at a time when Respondent was A'Aabbott's

1892primary qualifying agent.

189527. At all times material to the instant case, Section

1905489.129(1)(n), Florida Statutes, has authorized the Board to take

1914punitive action against a contractor if the contractor or the

1924business entity for which the contractor is a primary qualifying


1935Commit[s] incompetency or misconduct in the

1941practice of contracting.

"1944[I] ncompetency or misconduct in the practice of contracting," as

1954used Section 489.129(1)(n), Florida Statutes, includes the

"1961[f] ailure to honor a warranty." Rule 61G4-17.001(14)(a),

1969Florida Administrative Code.

197228. At all times material to the instant case, Section

1982489.129(1)(j), Florida Statutes, has authorized the Board to take

1991punitive action against a contractor if the contractor or the

2001business entity for which the contractor is a primary qualifying


2012Fail[s] in any material respect to comply

2019with the provisions of this part or

2026violat[ es] a rule or lawful order of the

2035[B] oard.

2037As noted in the Amended Administrative Complaint issued in this

2047case, among "the provisions of this part" (Part I of Chapter 489,

2059Florida Statutes) in effect at the time A'Aabbott and Agostinelli

2069entered into the Contract was the provision (in Section

2078489.119(5)(b), Florida Statutes) requiring that "the registration

2085or certification number of each contractor . . . appear in

2096any . . . advertising medium used by the contractor." At all

2108times material to the instant case, former Rule 21E-12.011 (now

2118Rule 61G4-12.011), Florida Administrative Code, provided, in

2125pertinent part, that, as used in Chapter 489, Florida Statutes,

"2135the terms 'advertise' and 'advertises' shall apply to . . .


214729. The foregoing statutory provisions are "in

2154effect, . . . penal statute[s] . . . This being true the[y] must

2168be strictly construed and no conduct is to be regarded as

2179included within [them] that is not reasonably proscribed by

2188[them]. Furthermore, if there are any ambiguities included such

2197must be construed in favor of the . . . licensee." Lester v.

2210Department of Professional and Occupational Regulations , 348 So.

22182d 923, 925 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); see also Whitaker v. Department

2230of Insurance and Treasurer , 680 So. 2d 528, 531 (Fla. 1st DCA

22421996)("[b] ecause the statute [Section 626.954(1)(x)4, Florida

2250Statutes] is penal in nature, it must be strictly construed with

2261any doubt resolved in favor of the licensee").

227030. An examination of the evidentiary record in the instant

2280case reveals that the Department has clearly and convincingly

2289established that Respondent, in his capacity as A'Aabbott's

2297primary qualifying agent, committed the violations alleged in

2305Counts I and II of the Amended Administrative Complaint.

2314Punitive action against Respondent is therefore warranted.

232131. In determining the particular punitive action the Board

2330should take against Respondent for having committed these

2338violations, it is necessary to consult Chapter 61G4-17, Florida

2347Administrative Code, which contains the Board's "penalty

2354guidelines." Cf. Williams v. Department of Transportation , 531

2362So. 2d 994, 996 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)(an agency is required to

2374comply with its disciplinary guidelines in taking disciplinary

2382action against its employees).

238632. Rule 61G4-17.001, Florida Administrative Code,

2392provides, in pertinent part, as follows:

2398Normal Penalty Ranges. The following

2403guidelines shall be used in disciplinary

2409cases, absent aggravating or mitigating

2414circumstances and subject to the other

2420provisions of this Chapter. . . .

2427(10) 489.129(1)(j): Failing in any material

2433respect to comply with the provisions of Part

2441I of Chapter 489. . . .

2448(e) 489.119: License number not appearing

2454in advertisement. First violation, $100;

2459repeat violation, reprimand and $250 to

2465$1,000 fine. . . .

2471(14) Misconduct or incompetency in the

2477practice of contracting as set forth in

2484Section 489.129(1)(n), Florida Statutes,

2488shall include, but is not limited to:

2495(a) Failure to honor a warranty. . .

2503(d) The following guidelines shall apply to

2510cases involving misconduct or incompetency in

2516the practice of contracting, absent

2521aggravating or mitigating circumstances:

25251. Misconduct by failure to honor warranty.

2532First violation, $500 to $1,000 fine; repeat

2540violation, $1,000 to $2,000 fine and/or

2548probation, suspension, or revocation.

2552(20) For any violation occurring after

2558October 1, 1989, the [B] oard may assess the

2567costs of investigation and prosecution. The

2573assessment of such costs may be made in

2581addition to the penalties provided by these

2588guidelines without demonstration of

2592aggravating factors set forth in rule 61G4-


2600(21) For any violation occurring after

2606October 1, 1989, the [B] oard may order the

2615contractor to make restitution in the amount

2622of financial loss suffered by the consumer.

2629Such restitution may be ordered in addition

2636to the penalties provided in these guidelines

2643without demonstration of aggravating factors

2648set forth in rule 61G4-17.002, and to the

2656extent that such order does not contravene

2663federal bankruptcy law. . .

266833. "Repeat violation," as used in Chapter 61G4-17, Florida

2677Administrative Code, is described in Rule 61G4-17.003, Florida

2685Administrative Code, as follows:

2689(1) As used in this rule, a repeat violation

2698is any violation on which disciplinary action

2705is being taken where the same licensee had

2713previously had disciplinary action taken

2718against him or received a letter of guidance

2726in a prior case; and said definition is to

2735apply ( i) regardless of the chronological

2742relationship of the acts underlying the

2748various disciplinary actions, and

2752(ii) regardless of whether the violations in

2759the present or prior disciplinary actions are

2766of the same or different subsections of the

2774disciplinary statutes.

2776(2) The penalty given in the above list for

2785repeat violations is intended to apply only

2792to situations where the repeat violation is

2799of a different subsection of Chapter 489 than

2807the first violation. Where, on the other

2814hand, the repeat violation is the very same

2822type of violation as the first violation, the

2830penalty set out above will generally be

2837increased over what is otherwise shown for

2844repeat violations on the above list.

285034. Rule 61G4-17.005, Florida Administrative Code, provides

2857that "[w]here several of the . . . violations [enumerated in

2868Rule 61G4-17.001, Florida Administrative Code] shall occur in one

2877or several cases being considered together, the penalties shall

2886normally be cumulative and consecutive."

289135. The aggravating and mitigating circumstances which are

2899to be considered before a particular penalty is chosen are listed

2910in Rule 61G4-17.002, Florida Administrative Code. They are as


2920(1) Monetary or other damage to the

2927licensee's customer, in any way associated

2933with the violation, which damage the licensee

2940has not relieved, as of the time the penalty

2949is to be assessed. (This provision shall not

2957be given effect to the extent it would

2965contravene federal bankruptcy law.)

2969(2) Actual job-site violations of building

2975codes, or conditions exhibiting gross

2980negligence, incompetence, or misconduct by

2985the licensee, which have not been corrected

2992as of the time the penalty is being assessed.

3001(3) The severity of the offense.

3007(4) The danger to the public.

3013(5) The number of repetitions of offenses.

3020(6) The number of complaints filed against

3027the licensee.

3029(7) The length of time the licensee has


3038(8) The actual damage, physical or

3044otherwise, to the licensee's customer.

3049(9) The deterrent effect of the penalty


3057(10) The effect of the penalty upon the

3065licensee's livelihood.

3067(11) Any efforts at rehabilitation.

3072(12) Any other mitigating or aggravating


307936. Having considered the facts of the instant case in

3089light of the provisions of Chapter 61G4-17, Florida

3097Administrative Code, it is the view of the undersigned that the

3108appropriate punitive action to take against Respondent in the

3117instant case is to require him to pay a fine in the amount of

3131$1,100.00, to pay the amount of $1,025.00 in restitution to

3143Agostinelli, and to reimburse the Department (a) for all

3152reasonable costs associated with the investigation that led to

3161the filing of the charges set forth in the Amended Administrative

3172Complaint, 4 and (b) for all reasonable costs associated with its

3183successful prosecution of these charges. 5


3190Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

3200Law, it is

3203RECOMMENDED that the Department issue a final order: (1)

3212finding Respondent guilty of the violations of Chapter 489,

3221Florida Statutes, alleged in Counts I and II of the Amended

3232Administrative Complaint, and (2) fining Respondent $1,100.00 for

3241having committed these violations and requiring him to pay

3250$1,025.00 to Agostinelli in restitution and to reimburse the

3260Department for all reasonable costs associated with the

3268Department's investigation and prosecution of the charges set

3276forth in the Amended Administrative Complaint.

3282DONE AND ENTERED this 16th day of July, 1997, in

3292Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.



3300Administrative Law Judge

3303Division of Administrative Hearings

3307The DeSoto Building

33101230 Apalachee Parkway

3313Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060

3316(904) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675

3320Fax Filing (904) 921-6847

3324Filed with the Clerk of the

3330Division of Administrative Hearings

3334this 16th day of July, 1997.


33411 At the outset of the final hearing, pursuant to Petitioner's

3352request, the style of the instant case was amended to reflect

3363that Respondent's first name is John, not James.

33712 Such notice was in the form of a Notice of Hearing by Video

3385Teleconference mailed to the Department and Respondent on

3393March 28, 1997.

33963 The body of the affidavit reads as follows:

34051. I, Kelly Goodman, am employed by the

3413Department of Business and Professional

3418Regulation and my duties include

3423responsibilities as the custodian of the

3429Complaint Cost Management System Complaint

3434Cost Summary Report records.

34382. I have conducted a diligent search of the

3447official records of the Department pertaining

3453to Costs incurred by the Department pursuant

3460to Complaint Number 93-16388, Licensee Name:

3466John R. O'Brien; Complainant(s) Name(s):

3471Nereo F. Agostinelli.

34743. In my capacity as custodian of the

3482records, I hereby certify that the attached

3489page entitled Complaint Management System,

3494Complaint Cost Summary is a true and correct

3502copy of the cost summary data compilation on

3510file with the Department.

35144. The enclosed data compilation reflects

3520total costs recorded in the amount of $401.48

3528as of this date July 8, 1997.

35355. It is the regular practice of the

3543Department to maintain Cost Summary Reports

3549on each complaint filed with the Department.

3556These Cost Summary reports are kept in the

3564regular course of business of the Department,

3571and are based upon information transmitted by

3578employees assigned to investigate, file, and

3584pursue the complaint through the

3589Administrative Complaint process contained in

3594Florida Statutes 120.57, and Florida Statutes

3600455 and 489.

36034 Pursuant to Rule 61G4-12.018, Florida Administrative Code, the

3612Department is required

3615to submit to the Board an itemized listing of

3624all costs related to investigation and

3630prosecution of an administrative complaint

3635when said complaint is brought before the

3642Board for final agency action.

3647Fundamental fairness requires that the Board provide a respondent

3656with an opportunity to dispute and challenge the accuracy and/or

3666reasonableness of the Department's itemization of investigative

3673and prosecutorial costs before determining the amount of costs a

3683respondent will be required to pay.

36895 The undersigned disagrees with the suggestion made by the

3699Department in its proposed recommended order that there is reason

3709to deviate from the "normal penalty ranges" in the instant case

3720and revoke Respondent's license. The Department has not shown

3729that the circumstances surrounding Respondent's violations are

3736significantly more "aggravating" than those which are typically

3744present when a contractor fails to honor a warranty in violation

3755of Section 489.129(1)(n), Florida Statutes, and fails to include

3764his license number on a contract in violation of Section

3774489.119(5)(b), Florida Statutes, and therefore also Section

3781489.129(1)(j), Florida Statutes.


3787Ruby Seymour-Barr, Senior Attorney

3791Department of Business and Professional Regulation

37971940 North Monroe Street

3801Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0792

3804John Randolph O'Brien

38076823 Bayshore Drive

3810Lantana, Florida 33642

3813Rodney Hurst, Executive Director

3817Construction Industry Licensing Board

38217960 Arlington Expressway, Suite 300

3826Jacksonville, Florida 32211

3829Lynda L. Goodgame, General Counsel

3834Department of Business and Professional Regulation

38401940 North Monroe Street

3844Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0792


3853All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within 15

3864days from the date of this recommended order. Any exceptions to

3875this recommended order should be filed with the agency that will

3886issue the final order in this case.

Select the PDF icon to view the document.
Date: 07/16/1997
Proceedings: Recommended Order
Date: 07/16/1997
Proceedings: Recommended Order sent out. CASE CLOSED. Hearing held 06/11/97.
Date: 07/09/1997
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Proposed Recommended Order (unsigned) filed.
Date: 07/08/1997
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Proposed Recommended Order filed.
Date: 06/27/1997
Proceedings: Transcript filed.
Date: 06/11/1997
Proceedings: Video Teleconference Hearing Held; see case file for applicable time frames.
Date: 06/05/1997
Proceedings: Exhibits filed.
Date: 05/21/1997
Proceedings: (Petitioner) Notice of Taking Deposition filed.
Date: 03/28/1997
Proceedings: Notice of Hearing by Video Teleconference sent out. (Video Hearing set for 6/11/97; 9:15; Tallahassee-Ft Lauderdale)
Date: 03/14/1997
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Response to Initial Order (filed via facsimile).
Date: 03/13/1997
Proceedings: Letter to SMS from C. Autsin Re: Non-Representation of respondent filed.
Date: 03/05/1997
Proceedings: Initial Order issued.
Date: 02/27/1997
Proceedings: Agency Referral letter; Petitioner`s First Request For Admissions; Amended Administrative Complaint filed.

Case Information

Date Filed:
Date Assignment:
Last Docket Entry:
Plantation, Florida
Department of Business and Professional Regulation

Related DOAH Cases(s) (1):

Related Florida Statute(s) (8):

Related Florida Rule(s) (5):