04-001765 Crown Outdoor Advertising, Inc., And Tropical Landholdings vs. Department Of Transportation
 Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Wednesday, January 19, 2005.


View Dockets  
Summary: Petitioner Outdoor Advertising Inc.`s sign permits applications were appropriately denied by Respondent, as the sites were not zoned for commercial or industrial activity.

1STATE OF FLORIDA

4DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

8CROWN OUTDOOR ADVERTISING, )

12INC., AND TROPICAL )

16LANDHOLDINGS, )

18)

19Petitioners, )

21)

22vs. ) Case Nos . 04 - 1764

30) 04 - 1765

34DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION, ) 04 - 1766

41)

42Respondent. )

44)

45RECOMMENDED ORDER

47Pursuant to notice, these causes came on for final hearing

57on October 7, 2004, in Tallahassee, Florida, before Fred L.

67Buckine, a duly - designated Administrative Law Judge of the

77Divisio n of Administrative Hearings. The following appearances

85were entered.

87APPEARANCES

88For Petitioners: Carl E. Patrick, Esquire

94Carl E. Patrick, P.A.

986823 Old Ranch Road

102Sarasota, Florida 34241 - 9640

107For Respondent: Erik R. Fennima n, Esquire

114Department of Transportation

117605 Suwannee Street

120Haydon Burns Building, Mail Station 58

126Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0450

131STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

135The issue in these causes is whether denial of Petitioners'

145outdoor advertisi ng sign site permit applications by Respondent

154were correctly determined under Subsection 479.111(2), Florida

161Statutes (2003), on the basis that the sign sites were unzoned

172commercial/industrial areas; and on the basis that within

180attending factual circums tances, the sign site did not qualify

190as unzoned commercial/industrial areas as defined in Subsection

198479.01(23), Florida Statutes (2003).

202PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

204On September 8, 2003, Petitioners, Crown Outdoor

211Advertising, Inc., and Tropical Landholdings, filed six

218applications for outdoor advertising sign site permits with

226Respondent, Department of Transportation (Department). By

232Notice dated September 23, 2003, the Department denied three of

242the six applications.

245On October 21, 2003, Petitioners filed three request for an

255administrative hearing contesting the three denials by the

263Department; and on April 19, 2004, the matter was referred to

274the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) requesting the

282assignment of an Administrative Law Judge to conduct a

291Chapter 120, Florida Statutes (2003), proceeding.

297On May 19, 2004, the Initial Order was entered, and on

308May 26, 2004, Respondent filed a response thereto. On June 9,

3192004, an Order of Consolidation for three cases (DOAH Case Nos.

33004 - 1764, 04 - 1765 and 04 - 2766) 1/ was entered. The consolidated

345cases were initially assigned to Administrative Law Judge

353William F. Quattlebaum.

356A Notice of Hearing scheduling the final hearing for

365July 22, 2004, and an Order of Pre - Hearing Instructions were

377entered on June 9, 2004,

382An unopposed motion for continuance filed by Petitioners

390was granted by Order dated July 1, 2004, rescheduling the final

401hearing for August 31, 2004. On July 16, 2004, an Unopposed

412Motion for Continuance filed by Respondent was granted by Order

422dated July 22, 2004, rescheduling the final hearing for

431October 7, 2004, in Tallahassee, Florida.

437Pre - hearing statements were filed on September 28 and

447October 1, 2004, respectively, by Respondent and Petitioners.

455The final hearing was held, as scheduled on October 7, 2004.

466At the final hearing, Petitioners presented the testimony

474of Lynn Holschuh, the Department's state administrator for

482outdoor advertising, and James Taylor Duff, part owner of

491Petitioner Tropical Landholdings. Petitioners' Exhibits A, B

498and C were admitted into evidence. Respondent also presented

507the testimony of its employee, Ms. Holschuh; and Respondent's

516Exhibits 2, 3, and 4 2/ were admitted into evidence.

526Official recognition was taken of Chapter 479, Florida

534Statutes (2003), 23 C.F.R. 750.708, and Florida Administrative

542Code Rules 9J - 5.003 and 14 - 10.0052; the City of North Port

556Ordinance No. 02 - 46, the City of North Port Comprehensive Plan;

568and the Final Order in DOAH Case No. 03 - 3682 issued on

581February 16, 2004, by Administrati ve Law Judge Barbara Staros. 3/

592The parties were directed to file proposed recommended

600orders within ten days from the date of the Transcript, which

611was filed with DOAH on October 22, 2004. The parties' joint

622motion for an extension of time to file p ropo sed recommended

634orders 20 days from the date of the Transcript was granted,

645which waived the time for this Recommended Order. See Florida

655Administrative Code Rule 28 - 106.216.

661On November 10 and 15, 2004, Respondent and Petitioners,

670respectively, timely f iled their Proposed Recommended Orders

678which have been considered by the undersigned in preparation of

688this Recommended Order.

691FINDINGS OF FACT

694Based upon the observation of the witnesses and their

703demeanor while testifying; documentary materials received in

710evidence; evidentiary rulings made pursuant to Sections 120.569

718and 120.57, Florida Statutes (2003); and the entire record of

728this proceeding, the following relevant and material findings of

737fact are determined:

7401. Petitioner, Tropical Landholdings, a Florida

746Corporation, was created in 1998 and purchased approximately 700

755to 800 acres of land comprised of residential multi - family and

767commercial properties along Interstate 75 (I - 75) in Punta Gorda,

778Florida. On September 8, 2003, Petitioner, Crown Adver tising,

787Inc., of Belleview, Florida, submitted three outdoor advertising

795sign site permit applications to the Department for review.

8042. On September 23, 2003, the Department denied the three

814outdoor advertising sign site permit applications for the

822foll owing reasons: (1) the sign sites were not permitted under

833the local land use designation of site ( § 479.111(2), Fla. Stat.

845(2003)) ; and (2) the sign sites did not qualify as unzoned

856commercial/industrial area. § 479.01, Fla. Stat. (2003) .

8643. The sign s ite permit application forms used by

874Petitioners in these causes were composed and authorized by the

884Department. The form required the applicant to obtain and

893provide information regarding the proposed sign site, what is

902proposed to be constructed on the site, and where the proposed

913construction is to occur.

9174. The sign site permit applications also required the

926applicant to secure information from the appropriate local

934zoning official of the future land use designation and the

944current zoning of the propo sed sites enacted by the local

955government's Comprehensive Plan and land use development

962regulations. This form required information from the local

970government as to whether the applicant is or is not in

981compliance with all adopted local ordinances. Permis sion to

990erect an outdoor sign structure on the identified sign site is

1001subject to approval by the City.

10075. Petitioners complied with the requested information.

1014The local government, the City of North Port, approved the three

1025sign site permit applicati ons in question and granted

1034Petitioners permission to erect three outdoor billboard signs.

1042This local grant of approval was then subjected to concurring

1052approval by the Department.

10566. After receiving the sign site permits that were

1065approved by the City, the Department engaged the services of a

1076consultant to conduct on - site review and identification of:

1086(1) the local government's designation for each proposed sign

1095site; (2) the permitted uses of each proposed sign site (local

1106drainage facilities, pipelin e corridors, underground

1112communication cables, electric transmission lines, and outdoor

1119advertising signs); and (3) a review of adjacent and surrounding

1129parcels. The consultant reported to the Department the factual

1138circumstances attendant the three local ly approved sign sites.

1147It should be noted that the consultant did not render an opinion

1159regarding the Department's approval or denial of the sign site

1169permit applications.

11717. The sign sites in question were zoned under the local

"1182land use designation" of the City of North Port's Ordinance

119202 - 46, Section 53.146 (Ordinance 02 - 46), as a "utility

1204industrial corridor." The zoned land was composed of strips of

1214land measuring 25 to 70 feet in width on the west side and 160

1228to 170 feet in width on the east sid e.

12388. The "permitted governmental uses" of a parcel zoned as

1248a "utility industrial corridor," included such uses as

1256underground communication cables, electric transmission lines,

1262and outdoor advertising signs. Ordinance 02 - 46, under the title

"1273Prohibite d Uses and Structures," specifically prohibits "all

1281commercial and industrial uses."

12859. Based upon a review of all information provided by

1295Petitioners, the local government, and its consultant, the

1303Department first determined the three sign sites on which the

1313subject signs were to be erected and located, prohibited

1322commercial or industrial uses. The Department then determined,

1330based upon an analysis of the materials provided by its

1340consultant and the City of North Port, the three sign sites in

1352question ha d not been zoned for commercial or industrial uses as

1364a part of the local government's comprehensive zoning plan.

1373Based upon (1) the prohibition of commercial or industrial uses

1383and (2) no commercial or industrial zoning of the sign sites,

1394the Department concluded these three sign sites were zoned

"1403primarily to permit outdoor advertising," a prohibited

1410function. The denials were required.

141510. Under the local land use designation of Ordinance

142402 - 46, the City of North Port's permitted uses included local

1436drainage facilities and a pipeline corridor.

144211. Under governmental uses designation of Ordinance

144902 - 46, the City of North Port's permitted uses included

1460underground communication cables, electric transmission lines,

1466and outdoor advertising. However, Or dinance 02 - 46 specifically

1476prohibits all commercial and industrial uses under the

1484governmental uses designation.

148712. When questioned by Petitioners, Ms. Holschuh testified

"1495that the Department's intent was to allow [sign] permits

1504whenever possible and neve r prohibit the installation of

1513billboards." From this specific statement of testimony,

1520Petitioners argued that "implementing the intent the Department

1528must look beyond the labels of the zoning and look at the actual

1541primary uses allowed under those design ations." (Emphasis

1549added.) Ms. Holschuh disagreed with Petitioners'

1555characterization of the Department's procedures and convincingly

1562maintained that the Department based its denials on "sign site

1572zoning" and factors considered for determining an "unzoned

1580commercial/industrial area" as defined by statute.

158613. Continuing with its argument, Petitioners conclude

"1593[T]he department . . . appears to be in conflict with Judge

1605Barbara Staros' decision of February 16, 2004, in a rule

1615challenge proceeding, where s he analyzed the Sign Permit

1624procedure under Section 479.07, Florida Statutes." In her Final

1633Order, Administrative Law Judge Barbara Staros made a Finding of

1643Fact in paragraph 30, stating:

1648Once the local government zoning official

1654certifies that the propo sed sign identified

1661in the application is in compliance with the

1669comprehensive plan adopted pursuant to

1674Chapter 163, the Department does not go

1681behind that certification to look factually

1687at whether the zoning action was consistent

1694with the comprehensive p lan. Page 13.

170114. The procedures followed by the Department in this

1710proceeding complied with Judge Staros Finding of Fact in

1719paragraph 31, where she wrote:

1724The Department uses the application and the

1731information contained therein to determine

1736whether a proposed sign location falls

1742within the definition of a "commercial or

1749industrial zone." If it does, [fall within]

1756then the Department determines whether those

1762designations were adopted as part of the

1769local government's comprehensive planning

1773efforts or w ere "primarily" adopted to

1780permit outdoor advertising signs on that

1786location. Page 30.

178915. Based upon it's receipt, review, and analysis of the

1799specific facts provided by all parties of interest, the

1808Department determined the sites where the signs were to be

1818erected prohibited commercial or industrial use. The Department

1826factually determined that no local zoning identified the sites

1835as commercial or industrial.

183916. The Department concluded correctly and in accord with

1848Florida Administrative Code Rule 1 4 - 10.0052 that these three

1859sign sites were zoned by the City of North Port, the local

1871governmental entity, "primarily to permit outdoor advertising"

1878contrary to sign site permit procedures under Section 479.07,

1887Florida Statutes (2003).

189017. Based upon th e evidence of record and considering the

1901size of the sign site, the local government's zoning of the

1912site, designated uses of the site, and prohibited uses on the

1923site, denial of the sign applications was correctly determined

1932pursuant to Subsection 479.111 (2), Florida Statutes (2003), and

1941Florida Administrative Code Rule 14 - 10.0052.

194818. Based on the testimonies of Ms. Holschuh and James

1958Duff, who testified regarding his ownership, property taxes

1966paid, and the investors' inability to use the property in

1976qu estion to their economic advantage, Petitioners failed to

1985carry the burden of producing a preponderance of credible

1994evidence to establish that the Department incorrectly and/or

2002wrongfully denied Petitioners' applications for three sign site

2010permits pursuan t to Subsection 479.111(2), Florida Statutes

2018(2003), and Florida Administrative Code Rule 14 - 10.0052.

2027CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

203019. The Division of Administrative Hearings has

2037jurisdiction over the parties to and the subject matter of this

2048proceeding pursuant to Section 120.569 and Subsection 120.57(1),

2056Florida Statutes (2003).

205920. Respondent, Department of Transportation, is the state

2067agency responsible for enforcing federal regulations of outdoor

2075advertising pursuant to Section 479.02, Florida Statutes (2003 ),

2084that authorizes the Department to:

2089(1) Administer and enforce the provisions

2095of this chapter and the agreement between

2102the state and the United States Department

2109of Transportation relating to the size,

2115lighting, and spacing of signs in accordance

2122wit h Title I of the Highway Beautification

2130Act of 1965 and Title 23, United States

2138Code, and federal regulations in effect as

2145of the effective date of this act.

2152(2) Regulate size, height, lighting, and

2158spacing of signs permitted in zoned and

2165unzoned comm ercial areas and zoned and

2172unzoned industrial areas on the interstate

2178highway system and the federal - aid primary

2186highway system.

2188(3) Determine unzoned commercial areas

2193and unzoned industrial areas.

2197* * *

2200(7) Adopt such rules as it deems

2207necessary or proper for the administration

2213of this chapter, including rules which

2219identify activities that may not be

2225recognized as industrial or commercial

2230activities for purposes of determination of

2236an area as an unzoned commercial or

2243industrial area.

224521. Feder al law and regulations provide the basis and

2255authority for Florida's requirement that signs be located within

2264commercial or industrial areas. See 23 U.S.C. 131(d) that

2273states, in pertinent part,

2277[S]igns may be erected and maintained . . .

2286within areas . . . which are zoned

2294industrial or commercial under authority of

2300State Law, or in unzoned commercial or

2307industrial areas . . . as may be determined

2316by agreement between the State and the

2323Secretary. . . States shall have full

2330authority . . . to zone areas fo r commercial

2340or industrial purposes.

234322. Commercial or industrial zones and unzoned commercial

2351or industrial areas are defined in Subsection 479.01(3)

2359and (23), Florida Statutes (2003), as:

2365(3) "Commercial or industrial zone" means

2371a parcel of land de signated for commercial

2379or industrial use under both the future land

2387use map of the comprehensive plan and the

2395land use development regulations adopted

2400pursuant to chapter 163. If a parcel is

2408located in an area designated for multiple

2415uses on the future l and use map of a

2425comprehensive plan and the land development

2431regulations do not clearly designate that

2437parcel for a specific use, the area will be

2446considered an unzoned commercial or

2451industrial area if it meets the criteria of

2459subsection (23).

2461* * *

2464( 23) "Unzoned commercial or industrial

2470area" means a parcel of land designated by

2478the future land use map of the comprehensive

2486plan for multiple uses that include

2492commercial or industrial uses but are not

2499specifically designated for commercial or

2504industria l uses under the land development

2511regulations, in which three or more separate

2518and distinct conforming industrial or

2523commercial activities are located.

2527(a) These activities must satisfy the

2533following criteria:

25351. At least one of the commercial or

2543industrial activities must be located on the

2550same side of the highway and within 800 feet

2559of the sign location;

25632. The commercial or industrial

2568activities must be within 660 feet from the

2576nearest edge of the right - of - way; and

25863. The commercial i ndustrial activities

2592must be within 1,600 feet of each other.

2601Distances specified in this paragraph must

2607be measured from the nearest outer edge of

2615the primary building or primary building

2621complex when the individual units of the

2628complex are connected by covered walkways.

2634(b) Certain activities, including, but

2639not limited to, the following, may not be so

2648recognized as commercial or industrial

2653activities:

26541. Signs.

26562. Agricultural, forestry, ranching,

2660grazing, farming, and related activities ,

2665including, but not limited to, wayside fresh

2672produce stands.

26743. Transient or temporary activities.

26794. Activities not visible from the main -

2687traveled way.

26895. Activities conducted more than 660

2695feet from the nearest edge of the right - of -

2706way.

27076. Activities conducted in a building

2713principally used as a residence.

27187. Railroad tracks and minor sidings.

27248. Communication towers.

272723. Petitioners, as applicants for sign permits and the

2736parties seeking affirmative relief, have the bur den of proof by

2747a preponderance of the evidence to establish that the Department

2757wrongfully denied their applications for three sign site permits

2766pursuant to Subsection 479.111(2), Florida Statutes (2003), and

2774Florida Administrative Code Rule 14 - 10.0052. Florida Department

2783of Transportation v. J.W.C. Co. Inc. , 396 So. 2d 778 (Fla. 1st

2795DCA 1981).

279724. Petitioners failed to produce, through the testimonies

2805of Ms. Holschuh and James Duff, a preponderance of credible

2815evidence of record that the alleged factual basis relied upon by

2826the Department pursuant to Subsection 479.111(2), Florida

2833Statutes (2003), and Florida Administrative Code Rule 14 -

284210.0052, resulted in wrongfully denying Petitioners' three

2849outdoor sign site permit applications.

2854RECOMMENDED ORDER

2856B ased upon the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law,

2867it is

2869RECOMMENDED that Respondent, Department of Transportation,

2875enter a final order of dismissal of Petitioners, Crown Outdoor

2885Advertising, Inc., and Tropical Landholdings', challenge of the

2893denial of its three outdoor advertisement sign site permit

2902applications.

2903DONE AND ENTERED this 19th day of January, 2005, in

2913Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

2917S

2918FRED L. BUCKINE

2921Administrative Law Judge

2924Division of Administrativ e Hearings

2929The DeSoto Building

29321230 Apalachee Parkway

2935Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3060

2940(850) 488 - 9675 SUNCOM 278 - 9675

2948Fax Filing (850) 921 - 6847

2954www.doah.state.fl.us

2955Filed with the Clerk of the

2961Division of Administrative Hearings

2965this 19th day of January , 2005.

2971ENDNOTES

29721/ In Case No. 04 - 1764, the applications denied were for Permit

2985Nos. 54579 and 54580; Case No. 04 - 1765, the applications denied

2997were for Permit Nos. 54838 and 54584; and Case No. 04 - 1766, the

3011application denied were for Permit Nos. 545 81 and 54582.

30212/ Respondent's Exhibit 2, 3 and 4 are applications for sign

3032site permits at three different locations at State Road 93

3042(I - 75) south of Toledo Blade Boulevard, Sarasota, Florida.

30523/ In Florida Outdoor Advertising Association, Inc.; Clear water

3061Channel Outdoor, Inc.; Koala L.L.C.; Viacom Outdoor, Inc. d/b/a/

3070National Advertising Company v. Department of Transportation ,

3077Case No. 03 - 3682RP (DOAH February 16, 2004), Petitioners, all of

3089whom are engaged in the business of outdoor advertising,

3098c hallenged the Department proposed Florida Administrative Code

3106Rule 14 - 10.0052 as an invalid exercise of delegated legislative

3117authority. The proposed rule was found to be valid and the

3128challenge dismissed. Petitioners appealed Administrative Law

3134Judge Ba rbara Staros' Final Order and the appeal was dismissed.

3145Florida Administrative Code Rule 14 - 10.0052 was a valid rule at

3157all times material to the above proceeding.

3164Petitioners' arguments, both at hearing and in post - hearing

3174submittals, that based upon " an agreement between the Department

3183and Petitioners," as a condition of the dismissal of their

3193appeal that the Department would amend Florida Administrative

3201Code Rule 14 - 10.0052, is without merit and not considered in

3213this proceeding by the undersigned.

3218COPIES FURNISHED :

3221Erik Fenniman, Esquire

3224Department of Transportation

3227605 Suwannee Street

3230Haydon Burns Building, Mail Station 58

3236Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0450

3241Carl E. Patrick, Esquire

3245Carl E. Patrick, P.A.

32496823 Old Ranch Road

3253Sarasota, Florida 34241 - 9640

3258James C. Myers, Clerk of Agency Proceedings

3265Department of Transportation

3268605 Suwannee Street

3271Haydon Burns Building, Mail Stop 58

3277Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0450

3282Pamela Leslie, General Counsel

3286Department of Transportation

3289605 Suwannee Street

3292Haydon Burns Building, Mail Stop 58

3298Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0450

3303NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

3309All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within

331915 days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions

3330to this Recommended Or der should be filed with the agency that

3342will issue the final order in these cases.

Select the PDF icon to view the document.
PDF
Date
Proceedings
PDF:
Date: 01/23/2006
Proceedings: Opinion filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/23/2006
Proceedings: Mandate filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/13/2006
Proceedings: Mandate
PDF:
Date: 12/28/2005
Proceedings: Opinion
PDF:
Date: 08/29/2005
Proceedings: BY ORDER OF THE COURT: Appellee`s motion for extension of time is granted and the answer brief shall be served by September 13, 2005.
PDF:
Date: 06/03/2005
Proceedings: BY ORDER OF THE COURT: Appellant`s motion for extension of time is granted.
Date: 04/01/2005
Proceedings: Acknowledgement of New Case, Second DCA Case No. 2D05-1534 filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/25/2005
Proceedings: Notice of Appeal filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/01/2005
Proceedings: Agency Final Order
Date: 03/01/2005
Proceedings: Agency Final Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/19/2005
Proceedings: Recommended Order
PDF:
Date: 01/19/2005
Proceedings: Recommended Order (hearing held October 7, 2004). CASE CLOSED.
PDF:
Date: 01/19/2005
Proceedings: Recommended Order cover letter identifying the hearing record referred to the Agency.
PDF:
Date: 11/15/2004
Proceedings: Proposed Final Order (filed by Petitioner Crown Outdoor Advertising).
PDF:
Date: 11/15/2004
Proceedings: Petitioners` Memorandum of Law filed.
PDF:
Date: 11/12/2004
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Memorandum of Law (filed via facsimile).
PDF:
Date: 11/10/2004
Proceedings: Proposed Final Order (filed by Petitioner via facsimile).
PDF:
Date: 11/10/2004
Proceedings: Respondent`s Proposed Recommended Order filed.
Date: 10/22/2004
Proceedings: Transcript filed.
Date: 10/07/2004
Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
PDF:
Date: 10/01/2004
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Pre-hearing Statement (filed via facsimile).
PDF:
Date: 10/01/2004
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Answers to Respondent`s First Set of Interrogatories (filed via facsimile).
PDF:
Date: 10/01/2004
Proceedings: Notice of Service (filed by Petitioner via facsimile).
PDF:
Date: 09/28/2004
Proceedings: Respondent`s Pre-hearing Statement (filed via facsimile).
PDF:
Date: 09/28/2004
Proceedings: Respondent`s Motion to Compel Discovery (filed via facsimile)
PDF:
Date: 08/06/2004
Proceedings: Respondent`s Notice of Serving its First Set of Interrogatories (filed via facsimile).
PDF:
Date: 07/22/2004
Proceedings: Order Granting Continuance and Re-scheduling Hearing (hearing set for October 7, 2004; 9:00 a.m.; Tallahassee, FL).
PDF:
Date: 07/16/2004
Proceedings: Respondent`s Unopposed Motion for Continuance (filed via facsimile).
PDF:
Date: 07/08/2004
Proceedings: Order Granting Continuance and Re-scheduling Hearing (hearing set for August 31, 2004; 9:00 a.m.; Tallahassee, FL).
PDF:
Date: 07/01/2004
Proceedings: Order on Stipulation (filed by Petitioner via facsimile).
PDF:
Date: 07/01/2004
Proceedings: (Proposed) Order on Motion for Continuance (filed by Petitioner via facsimile).
PDF:
Date: 07/01/2004
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Unopposed Motion for Continuance (filed via facsimile).
PDF:
Date: 07/01/2004
Proceedings: Stipulation for Substitution of Counsel (filed Petitioner via facsimile).
PDF:
Date: 06/09/2004
Proceedings: Order of Pre-hearing Instructions.
PDF:
Date: 06/09/2004
Proceedings: Notice of Hearing (hearing set for July 22, 2004; 9:00 a.m.; Tallahassee, FL).
PDF:
Date: 06/09/2004
Proceedings: Order of Consolidation. (consolidated cases are: 04-001764, 04-001765, and 04-001766)
Date: 06/08/2004
Proceedings: Order. (Respondent`s request to appear telephonically is granted)
PDF:
Date: 05/26/2004
Proceedings: Respondent`s Response to Initial Order (filed via facsimile).
PDF:
Date: 05/19/2004
Proceedings: Initial Order.
PDF:
Date: 04/28/2004
Proceedings: Notice of Denied Application Nos. 54583 and 54584 filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/19/2004
Proceedings: Petition to the Department of Transportation Requesting Administrative Hearing Involving Disputed Issues of Material of Fact for Denial of Agency File Numbers 54579, 54580, 54581, 54582, 54583 and 58584 (filed via facsimile).
PDF:
Date: 04/19/2004
Proceedings: Agency referral (filed via facsimile).

Case Information

Judge:
FRED L. BUCKINE
Date Filed:
04/28/2004
Date Assignment:
10/04/2004
Last Docket Entry:
01/23/2006
Location:
Tallahassee, Florida
District:
Northern
Agency:
ADOPTED IN TOTO
 

Counsels

Related Florida Statute(s) (6):