04-001184 Eric C. Quiroz vs. Health Central Hospital Status: Closed Recommended Order on Monday, August 9, 2004.

Summary: Petitioner failed to establish a prima facie case of unlawful discrimination because he did not appear at the hearing and did not submit evidence to support the allegations.

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

ERIC C. QUIROZ, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) Case No. 04 - 1184

)

HEALTH CENTRAL HOSPITAL, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursuant to notice, a formal hearing was convened in this

case on July 27, 2004, before Carolyn S. Holifield, a duly -

designated Administrative Law Judge of the Division of

Administrative Hearings, by video teleconference between Orlando

and Tallahassee, Florida.

APPEARANCES

Fo r Petitioner: No Appearance

For Respondent: Mark Van Valkenburgh, Esquire

Allen, Norton and Blue, P.A.

1477 West Fairbanks Avenue, Suite 100

Winter Park, Florida 32789

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

The issue is whether Respondent discri minated against

Petitioner on the basis of his national origin in violation of

Section 760.10, Florida Statutes (2003).

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

On September 18, 2003, Petitioner, Eric Quiroz, filed a

Charge of Discrimination with the Florida Commission on Human

Relations ("FCHR") alleging that Health Central Hospital

discriminated against him on the basis of national origin.

Specifically, Mr. Quiroz alleged that he was the only Hispanic

supervisor in the Environmental Service Department, that he had

been harassed and unfairly disciplined, and that his job had

been threatened. The FCHR issued a Determination: No Cause

dated March 25, 2004, which determined that there was no

reasonable cause to believe that an unemployment practice had

occurred.

On April 5 , 2004, Mr. Quiroz filed with the FCHR a Petition

for Relief in which he stated he was unlawfully terminated from

his job based on his race and that the firing was retaliation

for his filing the previous complaint. The FCHR referred the

Petition for Relie f to the Division of Administrative Hearings

for assignment of an Administrative Law Judge. A Notice of

Hearing was issued on April 22, 2004, scheduling the final

hearing for June 30, 2004, in Orlando, Florida. Respondent

filed a Motion to Continue ("Mot ion") the final hearing on

May 21, 2004. Petitioner did not file a response to the Motion,

and on June 11, 2004, the undersigned issued an Order Granting

Continuance and Re - Scheduling Hearing by Video Teleconference.

Pursuant to the Order, the final he aring was scheduled for

July 27, 2004, by video teleconference at designated sites in

Orlando and Tallahassee, Florida. The Order was mailed to both

parties at their addresses of record. Mr. Quiroz' address of

record is the address provided to the Divisi on of Administrative

Hearings and listed on all documents in the record that bear his

signature.

Mr. Quiroz did not appear at the hearing and no evidence or

testimony was presented on his behalf.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. No findings are made in this case. Pe titioner did not

appear and did not submit evidence to support findings of fact.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

2. The Division of Administrative Hearings has

jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter of this

proceeding. §§ 120.569 and 120.57(1), Fla. St at. (2003).

3. The parties received adequate notice of the

administrative hearing.

4. Subsection 760.10(1), Florida Statutes (2003), makes it

an unlawful employment practice for an employer to discharge or

to fail or refuse to hire any individual with respect to

compensation, terms, conditions, or privileges of employment

because of a person's race, color, religion, sex, national

origin, age, handicap, or marital status.

5. In employment discrimination cases such as this, the

petitioner, the employee , has the burden of establishing by a

preponderance of evidence a prima facie case of unlawful

discrimination. If a prima facie case is established, the

burden shifts to the respondent, the employer, to rebut the

preliminary showing by producing evidence that the adverse

action was taken for legitimate, non - discriminatory reasons. If

the respondent rebuts the prima facie case, the burden shifts

back to the petitioner to show by a preponderance of evidence

that the respondent's offered reasons for its empl oyment

decision were pretextual. See Texas Department of Community

Affairs v. Burdine , 450 U.S. 248 (1981).

6. Petitioner has the initial burden of establishing by a

preponderance of the evidence a prima facie case of unlawful

discrimination. Here, whe re Petitioner failed to establish a

prima facie case of discrimination, the inquiry ends. See

Ratliff v. State , 666 So. 2d 1008, 1012 - 13 (Fla. 1st DCA 1996),

aff'd, 679 So. 2d 1183 (1996), citing Arnold v. Burger Queen

Systems , 509 So. 2d 958 (Fla. 2d DC A 1987).

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

Law, it is

RECOMMENDED that the Florida Commission on Human Relations

enter a final order finding that Respondent did not unlawfully

discriminate against Petitioner an d dismissing the Petition for

Relief.

DONE AND ENTERED this 9th day of August, 2004, in

Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

S

CAROLYN S. HOLIFIELD

Administrative Law Judge

Division of Administrative Hearings

The DeSoto Bu ilding

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3060

(850) 488 - 9675 SUNCOM 278 - 9675

Fax Filing (850) 921 - 6847

www.doah.state.fl.us

Filed with the Clerk of the

Division of Administrative Hearings

this 9th day of August, 2004.

COPIES FURNISHED :

Denise Crawford, Agency Clerk

Florida Commission on Human Relations

2009 Apalachee Parkway, Suite 100

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Eric C. Quiroz

1242 Vizcaya Lakes Road

Ocoee, Florida 34761

Mark Van Valkenburgh, Esquire

Allen, Norton & Blue, P.A.

147 7 West Fairbanks Avenue, Suite 100

Winter Park, Florida 32789

Cecil Howard, General Counsel

Florida Commission on Human Relations

2009 Apalachee Parkway, Suite 100

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

All parties have the ri ght to submit written exceptions within

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

to this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that

will issue the final order in this case.