07-001138 Seminole County School Board vs. Douglas Porter
 Status: Closed
DOAH Final Order on Thursday, September 27, 2007.


View Dockets  
Summary: Respondent was terminated after being absent from duty without approved leave in violation of the Collective Bargaining Agreement. Recommend that Respondent`s employment be terminated.

1STATE OF FLORIDA

4DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

8SEMINOLE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD , )

13)

14Petitioner , )

16)

17vs. ) Case No. 07 - 1138

24)

25DOUGLAS PORTER , )

28)

29Respondent . )

32)

33RECOMMENDED ORDER

35Pursuant to notic e, a formal hearing was held in this

46case on May 7, 2007, in Sanford, Florida, before Jeff B.

57Clark, a duly - designated Administrative Law J udge of the

68Division of Administrative Hearings.

72APPEARANCES

73For Petitioner: Ned Julian, Jr., Esquire

79Seminole Cou nty School Board

84400 E ast Lake Mary Boulevard

90Sanford, Florida 32773 - 7127

95For Respondent: Pamela Hubbell Cazares, Esquire

101Chamblee, Johnson & Haynes, P.A.

106510 Vonderburg Drive, Suite 200

111Brandon, Florida 33511

114STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

118Whether Respondent, Douglas Porter, should be terminated

125for his third absence without leave in violation of the

135Collective Bargaining Agreement between Petitioner, Seminole

141County School Board, and the n on - i nstructional p ersonnel of

154Seminole County.

156PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

158On or about February 6, 2007, Respondent received a letter

168from Bill Vogel, Superintendent of Seminole County Public

176Schools, advising him that he, as Superintendent of Seminole

185County Public Schools, would be recommending to the School Board

195tha t it terminate Respondent's employment based on Respondent's

204third occurrence of being absent from duty without approved

213leave, violation of work rules , and insubordination. By letter

222dated February 22, 2007, Respondent, through his attorneys,

230requested a n administrative hearing.

235On March 9, 2007, Petitioner forwarded a Petition For

244Termination to the Division of Administrative Hearings and

252served same on Respondent's attorneys. The Petition for

260Termination, charges that "respondent be terminated for jus t

269cause do [ sic ] to third absence without approved leave pursuant

281to Article VII, Sections 5, 11, and 15 of the Official Agreement

293Between Non - Instructional Personnel of the Seminole County Board

303of Public I nstruction Association, Inc. [NIPSCO], and The Sc hool

314Board of Seminole County Florida, Sanford, Florida [SCSB]"

322("Collective Bargaining Agreement").

327On March 12, 2007 , an Initial Order was sent to both

338parties. Based on the parties' joint response, the case was

348scheduled for final hearing on May 7 an d 8, 2007, in Sanford,

361Florida.

362The final hearing was conducted on May 7, 2007. Petitioner

372presented four witnesses: Douglas Porter, Denis Quagliani,

379David Steindl and John Reichert. Petitioner's Composite

386Exhibit 1, a loose - leaf notebook containing num erous documents,

397was received into evidence.

401Respondent testified in his own behalf and presented the

410testimony of Craig Hope. Respondent's Exhibits 44 and 50 were

420received into evidence.

423In addition, Respondent and Petitioner offered Joint

430Exhibits 2 through 15 and 22 , which were received into evidence

441and marked accordingly.

444The agreement of the parties to submit their proposed

453recommended orders within 30 days of the transcript being filed

463was ratified. The T ranscript was filed on June 7, 2007.

474Mo tions were filed and granted for an extension of time to file

487proposed recommended orders to August 1, 2007. Both parties

496timely filed Proposed Recommended Orders.

501FINDINGS OF FACT

504Based on the oral and documentary evidence presented at the

514final hearin g in this matter and the joint stipulation submitted

525April 24, 2007, the following F indings of F acts are made:

5371. Respondent, Douglas Porter, is , and has been , employed

546by the School Board of Seminole County since July 13, 1993.

5572. Paul Hagerty and Wi lliam Vogel have been

566Superintendents of Public Schools for the School District of

575Seminole County, Florida , for all times material to the

584occurrences relevant to this case.

5893. Pursuant to Section 4, Art icle IX, Fl orida

599Const itution, and Sections 1001.30 , 1001.31, 1001.32, 1001.33,

6071001.41, and 1001.42 , Florida Statutes (2006), the School Board

616of Seminole County , Florida , is the governing board of the

626School District of Seminole County , Florida .

6334. The relationship of the parties is controlled by

642Flori da Statutes, the Collective Bargaining Agreement, and

650School Board policies.

6535. Respondent is an employee of Petitioner's Grounds

661Maintenance Department, 100 Division ("maintenance department").

669He began his employment in that division at the entry leve l

681position of Grounds Laborer I and worked his way up to Grounds

693Laborer II, prior to becoming a m echanic c rew l eader. As a

707mechanic crew leader, Respondent supervised three employees on

715his crew and interacted with principals and assistant principals

724to determine the landscaping needs of various schools.

732Respondent held the position of mechanic crew leader for

741approximately two years.

7446. Respondent has been employed by Petitioner for more

753than three years and is a "regular" employee and subject to th e

766Collective Bargaining Agreement, copies of which he receives

774annually.

7757. Article VII, Section 15, of the Collective Bargaining

784Agreement, provides, in pertinent part:

789Employees shall report absences and the

795reason for such absences prior to the start

803o f their duty day in accordance with

811practices established at each cost center.

817An employee who has been determined to have

825been AWOL shall be subject to the following

833progressive discipline procedures:

8361st Offense - Written reprimand and one day

844suspensi on without pay.

8482nd Offense - Five day suspension without

855pay.

8563rd Offense - Recommended for termination.

862Each day that an employee is AWOL shall be

871considered a separate offense. However, any

877documentation of offenses in this section

883shall be maintained in the employee's

889personnel file.

8918. Article VII, Section 15, has consistently been

899construed to apply to an employee's absence from his or her

910assigned duties for any portion of the day , as well as the

922entire day.

9249. An employee who is absent from his or her assigned work

936duties without the permission of the employee's supervisor is

945considered to be absent without leave.

95110. The Collective Bargaining Agreement requires that an

959employee call in before the start of the work day if he or she

973is going to b e absent; historically, maintenance department

982employees are given a 15 - minute grace period after the start of

995the work day to call in. Although not reduced to a written

1007directive, this practice is well - known within the maintenance

1017department .

101911. An empl oyee in the maintenance department who calls in

1030sick , is reported to the payroll clerk who checks the employee's

1041timesheet; if the employee has time on the books, he or she is

1054approved for pay for the sick time. If the employee does not

1066have time on the b ooks, he or she is charged with a sick day

1081with no pay.

108412. An employee who fails to call in, or calls in late, is

1097considered absent without leave if he or she does not physically

1108report for work that day or for the portion of the day missed

1121due to tardine ss. If the employee reports for work, he or she

1134is subject to discipline, but is paid for the hours worked. If

1146the employee calls in during the 15 - minute grace period and is

1159late, he or she is not subject to discipline, but is paid only

1172for the time work ed.

117713. Respondent had used 13 days of annual leave, 16 days

1188of sick and personal leave, and 27 days of unpaid leave in the

12012000 school year. This prompted Respondent's supervisor to

1209indicate that his attendance needed improvement in Respondent's

1217annual e valuation.

122014. As reflected in each of Respondent's a nnual

1229assessments during his employment, Respondent's absenteeism

1235created a hardship on his department and his attendance needed

1245improvement.

124615. Normally, an employee is not required to provide proof

1256of illness. In instances where an employee has excessive sick

1266days, validation of illness is required. Concern with

1274Respondent's excessive sick days prompted his supervisor to

1282require, by letter dated October 1, 2001, medical certification

1291of future illn ess that required missing work.

129916. By October 1, 2001, for the 2001 school year , which

1310began on July 1, 2001, Respondent had used six days of vacation,

1322eight days of paid leave, and four and a - half days of leave

1336without pay. This "abuse of sick leave" re sulted in a letter of

1349reprimand dated October 1, 2001, which was clearly intended to

1359warn Respondent to improve his attendance and required

1367validation of illness as referenced in the preceding paragraph.

137617. Respondent was absent on September 1, 2002. He did

1386not provide a medical validation of the illness causing the

1396absence and, as a result, the absence was treated as an absence

1408without leave. On September 18, 2002, Respondent received a

1417letter of reprimand and a one - day suspension without pay due to

1430his failure to provide medical verification for this unpaid

1439leave day. This invoked the first step of progressive

1448discipline as contained in the Collective Bargaining Agreement.

145618. On March 20, 2005, Respondent called in during the

1466late evening and left a m essage on his supervisor's voicemail

1477stating that he would not be at work the following day. The

1489message was vulgar and unacceptable. Respondent did not report

1498to work on March 21, 2005, and did not produce medical

1509verification for his absence.

151319. On M arch 28, 2005, his supervisor recommended that he

1524be suspended from work without pay for this absence without

1534leave, his second offense in the progressive discipline system.

1543On April 7, 2005, Respondent received a letter from the

1553Superintendent notifying him that he would be follow ing the

1563supervisor's disciplinary recommendation for Respondent's

1568absence without leave. The Superintendent's letter clearly

1575references Respondent's failure to give appropriate prior notice

1583of absences "in accordance with practi ces established at each

1593cost center," and warns that future failure to comply "with

1603procedures established at the Facilities Center to properly

1611report and receive approval for future absences" would result in

1621discipline in accordance with the Collective Ba rgaining

1629Agreement .

163121. On September 7, 2006, Respondent voluntarily entered

1639South Seminole hospital, a psychiatric facility. He was

1647discharged on or about September 25, 2006. Respondent's

1655condition required that he again be hospitalized on October 31,

16652006 , for four days. Respondent was diagnosed as suffering from

1675bipolar disorder.

167722. During his hospitalizations, Respondent was

1683administered various medications to treat his condition.

1690Following release from his second hospitalization, Respondent's

1697pres criptions were changed due to adverse side effects he was

1708experiencing.

170923. In addition to being diagnosed with bipolar disorder,

1718Respondent also voluntarily sought treatment for substance abuse

1726at the Grove Counseling Center through the outpatient

1734drug/su bstance abuse program.

173824. Respondent returned to work in November 2006, but was

1748still suffering from problems related to his medication. He was

1758late on November 8, 2006 , and absent on November 9, 2006.

1769Respondent had a meeting with his supervisor on No vember 10,

17802006; it was the supervisor's intention to recommend Respondent

1789for termination for the tardiness of November 8, 2006, and

1799absence of November 9, 2006. On November 10, 2006, Respondent

1809advised his supervisor that he had been diagnosed with bipo lar

1820disorder in September 2006 and that he was having problems with

1831his medication. As a result of this conversation, instead of

1841being recommended for termination, Respondent was given time off

1850to adjust his medications, and it was agreed that Respondent

1860would return to work on January 2, 2007.

186825. On January 9, 2007, approximately a week after

1877returning to work, Respondent called in at approximately

18857:10 a.m., his work day begins at 6:30 a.m ., to advise that he

1899had overslept and would be late to work. Re spondent arrived at

1911work at 7:28 a.m., 58 minutes after the start of his work day.

192426. As a result of this tardiness, Respondent's supervisor

1933recommended suspension and termination to the Superintendent for

1941a third offense of being absent without leave.

1949CO NCLUSIONS OF LAW

195327. The Division of Administrative Hearings has

1960jurisdiction of the parties and subject matter. § 120.57(1),

1969Fla . Stat . (200 7 ).

197628. The burden of proof is on Petitioner to establish by a

1988preponderance of the evidence the allegations for t ermination

1997for just cause that are alleged in the Petition For Termination

2008dated M arch 9, 2007. McNeill v. Pinellas County School Board ,

2019678 So. 2d 476 (Fla. 1996).

202529. Because the statute and rules providing grounds for

2034terminating Respondent's contract are penal in nature, they must

2043be construed in favor of the employee. See Rosario v. Burke ,

2054605 So. 2d 523 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992); Lester v. Department of

2066Prof essional Regulations , 348 So. 2d 923 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977).

207730. Where the employee sought to be termin ated is an

"2088educational support employee," Petitioner must act in

2095accordance with the provisions of Section 1012.40, Florida

2103Statutes (2006), which provides, in part, as follows:

2111(1) As used in this section:

2117(a) "Educational support employee" means

2122any person employed by a district school

2129system who is employed as . . . a member of

2140the maintenance department, . . . or any

2148other person who by virtue of his or her

2157position of employment is not required to be

2165certified by the Department of Education or

2172district school board pursuant to §1012.39.

2178* * *

2181(b) "Employee" means any person employed

2187as an educational support employee.

2192* * *

2195(2)(a) Each educational support employee

2200shall be employed on probationary status for

2207a period to be determined through the

2214appropriate collective bargaining agreement

2218or by district school board rule in cases

2226where a collective bargaining agreement does

2232not exist.

2234(b) Upon successful completion of the

2240probationary period by the employee, the

2246empl oyee's status shall continue from year

2253to year unless the superintendent terminates

2259the employee for reasons stated in the

2266collective bargaining agreement, or in

2271district school board rule in cases where a

2279collective bargaining agreement does not

2284exist, or reduces the number of employees on

2292a district wide basis for financial reasons.

2299(c) In the event a superintendent seeks

2306termination of an employee, the district

2312school board may suspend the employee with

2319or without pay. The employee shall receive

2326wri tten notice and shall have the

2333opportunity to formally appeal the

2338termination. The appeals process shall be

2344determined by the appropriate collective

2349bargaining process or by district school

2355board rule in the event there is no

2363collective bargaining agreeme nt.

236731. Respondent, having completed his probationary period,

2374is a regular employee and is subject to discipline pursuant to

2385Article VII, Sections 5, 11 , and 15 of the Collective Bargaining

2396Agreement dated July 1, 2006 , through June 30, 2010.

240532. The ref erenced Collective Bargaining Agreement ,

2412states, in pertinent part, as follows:

2418ARTICLE VII – EMPLOYMENT CONDITIONS

2423DISCIPLINE AND TERMINATION

2426Section 5.

2428A. Regular employees who have been hired

2435for a minimum of three (3) continuous years

2443(without a b reak in service) shall not be

2452disciplined (which shall include

2456reprimands), suspended or terminated except

2461for just cause.

2464* * *

2467C. An employee may be suspended without pay

2475or discharged for reasons including, but not

2482limited to, the following p roviding just

2489cause is present:

24921. Violation of School Board Policy

24982. Violation of work rules .

2504* * *

25078. Excessive tardiness

2510Section 11. Absence Without Leave

2515A. Employees will be considered absent

2521without leave if they fail to notify the ir

2530principal, appropriate director or

2534supervisor that they will be absent from

2541duty and the reason for such absence.

2548B. Absence without leave is a breach of

2556contract and may be grounds for immediate

2563dismissal.

2564* * *

2567Section 15.

2569Employees shal l report absences and the

2576reason for such absences prior to the start

2584of their duty day in accordance with

2591practices established at each cost center.

2597An employee who has been determined to have

2605been AWOL shall be subject to the following

2613progressive disci pline procedures:

26171st Offense - Written reprimand and one day

2625suspension without pay .

26292nd Offense - Five day suspension without

2636pay .

26383rd Offense - Recommended for termination.

2644Each day that an employee is AWOL shall be

2653considered a separate offense. How ever, any

2660documentation of offenses in this section

2666shall be maintained in the employee's

2672personnel file.

267432. "Just cause" is some substantial shortcoming

2681detrimental to the employer's interests, which the law and a

2691sound public opinion recognize as a goo d cause for dismissal.

2702A discharge for just cause will be upheld if it meets two

2714criteria: (1) it is reasonable to discharge the employee

2723because of misconduct ; and (2) the employee had notice, express

2733or fairly implied, that such conduct would be ground s for

2744discharge. I n R e Grievance of Towel , 655 A.2d 55 (Vt. 1995).

2757The criteria for determining just cause for

2764dismissal must be based on merit. The

2771standards must be job - related and in some

2780rational and logical manner touch upon

2786competency and ability. All that just cause

2793requires is that the cause for dismissal not

2801be religious or political, but concerned

2807solely with the inefficiency, delinquency,

2812or misconduct of the employee. Civil

2818Service Commission v. Poles , 573 A.2d 1169

2825(Pa. Commw. Ct. 1 990) .

28313 3. The maintenance department has established a practice,

2840as contemplated in Article VII, Section 15 of the Collective

2850Bargaining Agreement , which gives an employee a 15 - minute grace

2861period after the start of the work day to call in if he or she

2876is going to be late or absent. In the event an employee fails

2889to call in prior to the start of the work day or within the 15 -

2905m inute grace period, tardiness or absence is considered absence

2915without leave. These practices are consistently applied to all

2924maintenance department employees. As a general principle, the

2932construction of a statute or regulation by the administrative

2941agency charged with its enforcement and interpretation is

2949entitled to great weight and persuasive force, and the courts

2959will not depart from t hat interpretation unless it is clearly

2970erroneous . United States v. Seaboard Coast Line R.R. , 368 F.

2981Supp. 1079 (M.D. Fla. 1973); Daniel v. Florida State Turnpike

2991Authority , 213 So. 2d 585 (Fla. 1968); Cohen v. School Board of

3003Dade County , 450 So. 2d. 123 8 (Fla. 3 rd DCA 1984).

301534. Respondent's excessive absenteeism has been adequately

3022documented, as was the potential for his termination from

3031employment. He was aware of the established notification

3039procedure utilized in the maintenance department in the ev ent of

3050prospective absence or tardiness. He was put on notice in each

3061of his annual assessments that his absenteeism was burdensome to

3071his department and that his performance in that regard needed

3081improvement or was unsatisfactory. He was the subject of

3090progressive discipline, receiving a one - day and five - day

3101suspension. Under the terms of the Collective Bargaining

3109Agreement , a third offense would warrant termination. He was

3118reminded of the probability of termination for a third absence

3128without leave by the Collective Bargaining Agreement , his

3136supervisor and the Superintendent of Schools. When he revealed

3145a medical condition and counseling for substance abuse, he was

3155given more than a month off to adjust his medication and "get it

3168together."

316935. As p reviously stated, Petitioner has established that

3178it was the practice in the maintenance department to allow

3188employees to call in prior to the start of the work day and up to

320315 minutes after the start of the work day to avoid discipline

3215for an absence or tardiness; that failure to do so would result

3227in an absence without leave. Respondent called in 58 minutes

3237after the start of the work day and was, therefore, absent

3248without leave. He had been given notice that a third absence

3259without leave could lead to additional discipline as contemplated

3268by the Collective Bargaining Agreement . If this was the sole

3279reason for termination, it would be questionable, but after

3288Respondent's seven - year history of absenteeism, Petitioner's

3296cautionary counsel, its considerat ion of Respondent's medical

3304problem, and progressive discipline, termination for this third

3312offense is appropriate. Petitioner has met its burden of proof

3322by showing a preponderance of competent, substantial evidence to

3331support termination for just cause as contemplated by the

3340Collective Bargaining Agreement . C f. I ndustries, Inc. v . Long ,

3352364 So. 2d 864 (Fla. 2d DCA 1978); Johnson v . School Board of

3366Dade County , 578 So. 2d 387 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991.

3376RECOMMENDATION

3377Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

3387Law, it is

3390RECOMMENDED that a f inal o rder be entered finding

3400Respondent , Doug Porter , guilty of the allegations stated in the

3410Petition for Termination and that his employment be terminated.

3419DONE AND ENT ERED this 31st day of August , 2007 , in

3430Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

3434S

3435JEFF B. CLARK

3438Administrative Law Judge

3441Division of Administrative Hearings

3445The DeSoto Building

34481230 Apalachee Parkway

3451Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3060

3456(850) 488 - 9675 SUNCOM 278 - 9675

3464Fax Filing (850) 921 - 6847

3470www.doah.state.fl.us

3471Filed with the Clerk of the

3477Division of Administrative Hearings

3481this 31st day of August , 2007 .

3488COPIES FURNISHED :

3491Jeanine Blomberg, Interim Commissioner

3495Department of Education

3498Turlington Building, Suite 1 514

3503325 West Gaines Street

3507Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0400

3512Deborah K. Kearney, General Counsel

3517Department of Education

3520Turlington Building, Suite 1244

3524325 West Gaines Street

3528Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0400

3533Dr. Bill Vogel, Superintendent

3537Seminole County School Board

3541400 East Lake Mary Boulevard

3546Sanford, Florida 32773 - 7127

3551Ned N. Julian, Jr., Esquire

3556Seminole County School Board

3560400 East Lake Mary Boulevard

3565Sanford, Florida 32773 - 7127

3570Pamela Hubbell Cazares, Esquire

3574Chamblee, Johnson & Haynes, P.A.

357951 0 Vonderburg Drive, Suite 200

3585Brandon, Florida 33511

3588NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

3594All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within

360415 days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions

3615to this Recommended Order should b e filed with the agency that

3627will issue the Final Order in this case.

Select the PDF icon to view the document.
PDF
Date
Proceedings
PDF:
Date: 10/09/2007
Proceedings: Amended Final Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/28/2007
Proceedings: Final Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/25/2007
Proceedings: Agency Final Order
PDF:
Date: 08/31/2007
Proceedings: Recommended Order
PDF:
Date: 08/31/2007
Proceedings: Recommended Order (hearing held May 7, 2007). CASE CLOSED.
PDF:
Date: 08/31/2007
Proceedings: Recommended Order cover letter identifying the hearing record referred to the Agency.
PDF:
Date: 08/02/2007
Proceedings: Letter to Judge Clark from M. Keckler regarding proposed recommended order submitted on disk enclosed on case filed.
PDF:
Date: 08/01/2007
Proceedings: Respondent`s Proposed Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 08/01/2007
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Proposed Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 08/01/2007
Proceedings: Order Granting Extension of Time (proposed recommended orders to be filed by August 1, 2007).
PDF:
Date: 07/30/2007
Proceedings: Respondent`s Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Proposed Recommended Orders filed.
PDF:
Date: 07/20/2007
Proceedings: Order Granting Extension of Time (proposed recommended orders to be filed by July 30, 2007).
PDF:
Date: 07/18/2007
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Motion for Extension of Time to Serve and File Proposed Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/26/2007
Proceedings: Amended Order Granting Extension of Time (proposed recommended orders to be filed by July 23, 2007).
PDF:
Date: 06/19/2007
Proceedings: Order Granting Extension of Time (proposed recommended orders to be filed by June 28, 2007).
PDF:
Date: 06/15/2007
Proceedings: Corrected Respondent`s Motion for Extension of Time to File Proposed Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/14/2007
Proceedings: Respondent`s Unopposed Motion for Extension of Time to File Proposed Recommended Orders filed.
Date: 06/07/2007
Proceedings: Transcript (Volumes I and II) filed.
Date: 05/07/2007
Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
PDF:
Date: 04/24/2007
Proceedings: Joint Pre-hearing Stipulation filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/04/2007
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Response to Respondent`s First Request to Produce filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/26/2007
Proceedings: Order of Pre-hearing Instructions.
PDF:
Date: 03/26/2007
Proceedings: Notice of Hearing (hearing set for May 7 and 8, 2007; 9:00 a.m.; Sanford, FL).
PDF:
Date: 03/19/2007
Proceedings: Joint Response to Initial Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/16/2007
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Interrogatories filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/12/2007
Proceedings: Initial Order.
PDF:
Date: 03/09/2007
Proceedings: Notice of Appearance, Request for Hearing (filed by P. Hubbell).
PDF:
Date: 03/09/2007
Proceedings: Letter to D. Porter from B. Vogel regarding suspension from duty and termination of employment filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/09/2007
Proceedings: Petition for Termination filed.

Case Information

Judge:
JEFF B. CLARK
Date Filed:
03/09/2007
Date Assignment:
03/12/2007
Last Docket Entry:
10/09/2007
Location:
Sanford, Florida
District:
Middle
Agency:
ADOPTED IN TOTO
 

Counsels

Related Florida Statute(s) (7):