07-001436PL Department Of Health, Board Of Pharmacy vs. Denis R. Bousquet, R.Ph
 Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Friday, August 10, 2007.


View Dockets  
Summary: The fine and costs are not dischargeable in bankruptcy.

1STATE OF FLORIDA

4DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

8DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BOARD OF )

14PHARMACY , )

16)

17Petitioner , )

19)

20vs. ) Case Nos. 07 - 1436PL

27) 07 - 143 7PL

32DENIS R. BOUSQUET, R.PH , )

37)

38Respondent . )

41)

42RECOMMENDED ORDER

44On June 20, 2007, a formal administrative hearing in this

54case was held in Tallahassee, Florida, before William F.

63Quattlebaum, Administrative Law Judge, Division of

69Administrative Hearings .

72APPEARANCES

73For Petitioner: Patrick L. Butler, Esquire

79Bill i e Jo Owens, Esquire

85Department of Health

884052 Bald Cypress Way, Bin C - 65

96Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3265

101For Respondent: Denis R. Bousquet, pro se

1085125 Cedar Springs Drive, Unit 203

114Naples, Florida 34110

117STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE S

122The issue s in this case are whether the allegations set

133forth in the Administrative Complaints are correct , and , if so,

143wh at penalty should be imposed.

149PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

151On or about July 3, 2006, the Department of Health, Board

162of Pharmacy (Petitioner) , filed two Administrative Complaints

169against Denis R. Bousquet (Respondent) , alleging that the

177Respondent had violated th e requirements of a Final Order

187(DOH 05 - 0782 - S - MQA) filed May 3, 2005, which resolved two

202previous disciplinary actions against the Respondent

208(Petitioner's Case N os. 2002 - 25746 and 2002 - 27092) . The

221Respondent requested an administrative hearing. The Pe titioner

229forwarded the dispute to the Division of Administrative

237Hearings, which scheduled the matter for hearing.

244The Administrative Complaint filed in DOAH Case

251No. 07 - 1436PL incorrectly alleges that the referenced Final

261Order imposed a penalty of $12 ,652.66 (comprised of a fine

272of $2,000 and costs of $10,652.66) to be paid within six months

286of the filing of the Final Order and that the Respondent failed

298to pay the fine or costs.

304The Administrative Complaint filed in DOAH Case

311No. 07 - 1437PL correctly alleges that the referenced Final Order

322imposed a penalty of $12,852.66 (comprised of a fine of $2,000

335and costs of $10,852.66) and further imposed a license

345suspension followed by reinstatement with a period of

353probationary restrictions. Such restrictio ns included the

360requirement that the Respondent (or his employer) file various

369reports on a scheduled basis with the Petitioner's compliance

378officer. The Administrative Complaint alleges that the

385Respondent failed to submit the required reports.

392At the he aring, the Petitioner presented the testimony of

402the R espondent and of Cheryl Sellers and had E xhibits 1

414through 16 admitted into evidence. The Respondent testified on

423his own behalf, presented the testimony of Cheryl Sellers, and

433had E xhibits 1 through 4 admitted into evidence.

442A T ranscript of the hearing was filed on July 9, 2007 . The

456Petitioner filed a Proposed Recommended Order. The Respondent

464filed a letter , which has been treated as a Proposed Recommended

475Order.

476FINDINGS OF FACT

4791. The Petitioner is the state agency charged, pursuant to

489Chapter 465, Florida Statutes (2006) , with regulation of the

498practice of pharmacy.

5012. At all times material to this case, the Respondent was

512a licensed pharmacist in the State of Florida, holding license

522number PS 26142.

5253. On May 3, 2005, a Final Order (DOH - 05 - 0782 - S - MQA) was

543filed based on the stipulated resolution of disciplinary

551proceedings initiated against the Respondent by the Petitioner

559in DOH Case Nos. 2002 - 27092 and 2002 - 25746.

5704. The Final Order impos ed a suspension of the

580Respondent's license as follows:

584Respondent's license to practice pharmacy

589shall be suspended until such time as

596Respondent petitions and appears before the

602Board and can demonstrate that he is able to

611practice pharmacy with skill an d safety to

619patients. Proof of his ability to practice

626safely shall include an evaluation of

632respondent by the Professional Resources

637Network (PRN) and a recommendation from PRN

644to the Board that Respondent can practice

651pharmacy with reasonable skill and safety to

658patients.

6595. The Final Order imposed a probationary period as

668follows:

669Upon the termination of suspension of

675Respondent's license, Respondent's license

679shall be placed on probation concurrent with

686the PRN contract or three (3) years

693whichever i s longer. If, after completing

700an evaluation of Respondent, the PRN deems

707it necessary for Respondent to execute a

714contract for supervision and/or treatment,

719the three - year probationary period shall run

727concurrent with the PRN's contract. During

733the peri od or probation Respondent shall be

741subject to the following terms and

747conditions:

748a. Respondent or his employer shall submit

755written reports to the Compliance Officer at

762the Board office. The written reports shall

769contain Respondent licensee's name, li cense

775number, current address and phone number;

781current name, address and phone number of

788each pharmacy in which Respondent is engaged

795in the practice of pharmacy; the names of

803all pharmacists, pharmacy interns, pharmacy

808technicians, relief pharmacists, an d

813prescription department managers working

817with the Respondent. These reports shall be

824submitted to the Compliance Officer every

830three (3) months in a manner as directed by

839the Compliance Officer.

842* * *

845e. Respondent shall submit documentation

850evidencing that his employer, or if employed

857as a relief pharmacist, his supervision

863pharmacists(s) and the relief agency, have

869been provided with a copy of the Final Order

878describing these probationary terms within

883ten (10) days of the entry of the Final

892Order or upon initiation of employment.

898f. Respondent shall ensure that his

904employer or, if employed as a relief

911pharmacist, the supervising pharmacist at

916each pharmacy at which the Respondent works,

923submits written reports to the Compliance

929Officer fo r the Board of Pharmacy. These

937reports shall contain: the name, current

943address, license number, and telephone

948number o f each pharmacy intern, pharmacy

955technician, relief pharmacist, and

959prescription department manager working with

964the Respondent in the prescription

969department; a brief description of

974Respondent's duties and responsibilities;

978and Respondent's work schedule. These

983reports shall be submitted by the employer

990to the Compliance Officer every three (3)

997months in a manner directed by the Board.

10056. The Final Order imposed an administrative fine of

1014$2,000.

10167. In the stipulation for settlement of the disciplinary

1025cases, the assessment of costs was addressed as follows:

1034Respondent agrees to reimburse the

1039Department for any administrative costs

1044i ncurred in the investigation, prosecution,

1050and preparation of this case, not to exceed

1058eleven thousand dollars ($11,000). The

1064total amount of the costs will be assessed

1072at the time the stipulation is presented to

1080the Board. The fine and costs are to be

1089p aid by the Respondent . . . within sixty

1099(60) days of the filing of a Final Order

1108accepting and incorporating this Agreement.

11138. The copy of the stipulation admitted into evidence at

1123the hearing included a handwritten notation related to the time

1133for p ayment of the fine and costs and appears to indicate that

1146the 60 - day deadline for payment was extended to six months. The

1159source of the handwriting was unclear ; but in any event, the

1170Final Order adopted the agreed stipulation and assessed costs of

1180$10,852 .66. The Final Order extended the deadline for payment

1191of the costs to six months from the date of the Final Order, but

1205did not specifically reference the deadline for payment of the

1215administrative fine.

12179. The evidence establishes that both the fine and the

1227assessed costs were to be paid within six months of the date of

1240the Final Order, or by November 2, 2005.

124810. The evidence establishes that the Respondent paid

1256neither the fine nor the assessed costs by the November 2, 2005 ,

1268deadline.

126911. There is no evidence that the Respondent has made any

1280attempt to pay any portion of the financial penalty, and the

1291$12,852.66 remained unpaid at the time of the administrative

1301hearing.

130212. The Respondent's suspension was lifted pursuant to an

1311Order of Reinstatement filed June 28, 2005, at which time the

1322probationary period began.

132513. According to the Respondent's Responses to the

1333Petitioner's First Request for Admissions, the Respondent was

1341placed by "Healthcare Consultants" to work in relief status at

1351the Winn - Dixi e #736 pharmacy and at the Winn - Dixie #741 pharmacy

1366for a total of five days during the month of August 2005.

137814. According to the terms of the stipulation as adopted

1388by the Final Order, the Respondent's first quarterly report was

1398due three months followi ng the beginning of the probationary

1408period, or approximately September, 28, 2005.

141415. Cheryl Sellers, a c ompliance o fficer for the

1424Petitioner, was assigned the responsibility of monitoring the

1432Respondent's compliance with his obligations under the May 3,

14412005 , Final Order.

144416. The Respondent had several extended telephone

1451conversations with Ms. Sellers shortly after the Respondent's

1459probationary period began. During the conversations, the

1466specific disciplinary requirements of the stipulation and Final

1474O rder were discussed at length.

148017. Additionally, in 1997, the Petitioner had incurred a

1489substantially similar penalty, including a suspension, a fine,

1497and compliance with quarterly reporting requirements. It is

1505reasonable to presume that the Respondent w as aware of, and

1516understood, his obligations under the May 3, 2005 , Final Order.

152618. As was her standard practice, Ms. Sellers sent a

1536package of information to licensees with disciplinary

1543restrictions, including various forms, related to compliance

1550with r equirements set forth by Final Orders. The package was

1561mailed by regular mail to the Petitioner on August 4, 2005 ; but

1573for reasons unknown, the information was not delivered to the

1583Respondent and was returned to the Petitioner by the postal

1593service. The package was not re - mailed to the Respondent until

1605October 12, 2005.

160819. The Respondent filed his quarterly reports on

1616October 19, 2005, several weeks after the deadline had passed.

162620. Apparently the first Employer's Quarterly Report was

1634completed by an individual identified as Robert Miller,

1642presumably employed by Healthcare Consultants, an otherwise

1649unidentified entity which supposedly placed the Respondent in

1657the Winn - Dixie pharmacies for the August 2005 employment.

1667Mr. Miller was not the pharmacist in charge of the Winn - Dixie

1680units where the Respondent had been employed.

168721. By letter dated October 21, 2005, Compliance Officer

1696Cheryl Sellers notified the Respondent that he was "not in

1706compliance" with the May 3, 2005 , Final Order and stated as

1717foll ows:

1719Guidelines for submitting Employer Quarterly

1724Reports were sent to you on October 12,

17322005, the Employer's Quarterly Report from

1738Robert Miller received on October 19, 2005,

1745is not acceptable. Efren Rivera the PDM at

1753the Winn Dixie store #736 is the ap propriate

1762person to complete this form. [ sic ]

177022. The Employer's Quarterly Report subsequently submitted

1777by Efren Rivera was dated and notarized on November 1, 2005, and

1789was filed thereafter.

179223. The Respondent filed for Chapter 7 bankruptcy in late

180220 05 and was discharged from debt on January 31, 2006. The

1814Respondent has asserted that his obligation to pay the

1823administrative fine and assessed costs was discharged through

1831the bankruptcy.

1833CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

183624. The Division of Administrative Hearings h as

1844jurisdiction over the parties to and subject matter of this

1854proceeding. §§ 120.569 and 120.57(1), Fla. Stat. (200 6 ).

186425. The Petitioner has the burden of establishing the

1873allegations of the Administrative Complaints by clear and

1881convincing evidence. Department of Banking and Finance v.

1889Osborne Stern and Company , 670 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 1996); Ferris v.

1901Turlington , 510 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 1987). Clear and convincing

1911evidence is that which is credible, precise, explicit, and

1920lacking confusion as to the facts in issue. The evidence must

1931be of such weight that it produces in the mind of the trier of

1945fact the firm belief of conviction, without hesitancy, as to the

1956truth of the allegations. Slomowitz v. Walker , 429 So. 2d 797,

1967800 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983). The Peti tioner has met the burden.

197926. Section 465.016, Florida Statutes (2005), provides in

1987relevant part as follows:

1991465.016 Disciplinary actions. --

1995(1) The following acts constitute grounds

2001for denial of a license or disciplinary

2008action, as specified in s. 456.072(2):

2014* * *

2017(n) Violating a rule of the board or

2025department or violating an order of the

2032board or department previously entered in a

2039disciplinary hearing.

204127. The Respondent clearly failed to comply with the

2050disciplinary requirements of the Final Order filed May 3, 2005.

2060The Respondent failed to pay the fine and assessed costs and

2071failed to timely meet the reporting requirements set forth in

2081the Final Order. It should be noted that the discipline imposed

2092in that case was explicitly s et forth in a stipulation that was

2105executed by the parties and upon which the Final Order was

2116based.

211728. The Respondent asserts that his obligation to pay the

2127administrative fine and assessed costs identified in the May 3,

21372005 , Final Order was discharged by the bankruptcy filing. The

2147Respondent has cited no legal authority in support of the

2157assertion, and it is rejected.

216229. Eleven U.S.C. Section 523(a)7, provides that, insofar

2170as is material to this case, a discharge in bankruptcy does not

2182discharge an individual debtor from any debt " to the extent such

2193debt is for a fine, penalty, or forfeiture payable to and for

2205the benefit of a governmental unit, and is not compensation for

2216actual pecuniary loss . . . ."

222330. The Department of Health is a government al unit within

2234the executive branch of the government of the State of Florida.

2245§ 20.43, Fla . S tat . (200 5 ) . The Board of Pharmacy is a unit of

2264the Division of Medical Quality Assurance located within the

2273Department of Health. § 20.43(3)(g)10., Fla . Stat. (200 5 ).

228431. In this case, the $2,000 fine, payable to and for the

2297benefit of a governmental unit, is clearly exempted from

2306dischargeable debt, and the Respondent remains obligated to pay

2315the fine.

231732. The courts have uniformly held that assessments of

2326p rosecutorial costs in criminal cases are properly classified as

2336fines and are not dischargeable in bankruptcy. Such

2344classification has been extended to disciplinary actions against

2352Florida - licensed attorneys, where the goal of the disciplinary

2362action was to protect the public and the assessment of costs was

2374penal in nature and not compensation for actual pecuniary loss .

2385In re Cillo , 165 B.R. 46 (M.D. Fla. 1994) .

239533. The purpose of the Department of Health is to promote

2406and protect the health of all res idents and visitors in the

2418state, and includes the regulation of health practitioners as

2427necessary for the preservation of the health, safety, and

2436welfare of the public. § 20.43(1)(m), Fla . Stat. (200 5 ).

244834. The Legislature has stated that the practice o f

2458pharmacy is a learned profession and had further stated that the

" 2469sole legislative purpose for enacting this chapter is to ensure

2479that every pharmacist practicing in this state and every

2488pharmacy meet minimum requirements for safe practice. "

2495§ 465.002, Fla . Stat. (200 5 ).

250335. The Petitioner is specifically authorized to assess

2511prosecutorial costs by S ubs ection 456.072(4), Florida Statutes

2520(200 5 ) , which states that costs shall be assessed " [i]n addition

2532to any other discipline imposed through final order ," clearly

2541indicating that costs are assessed as a form of disciplinary

2551penalty, not simply to reimburse the governmental agency for

2560expenses.

256136. Accordingly, the assessed costs of $10,852.66 are

2570properly classified as a penalty in addition to the fine,

2580suspension , and probation imposed in the 2005 Final Order and is

2591not dischargeable in bankruptcy.

259537. S ubs ection 456.072 (2) , Florida Statutes (2005),

2604addresses the disciplinary penalties available to the Petitioner

2612and provides as follows:

2616(2) When the b oard, or the department when

2625there is no board, finds any person guilty

2633of the grounds set forth in subsection (1)

2641or of any grounds set forth in the

2649applicable practice act, including conduct

2654constituting a substantial violation of

2659subsection (1) or a vio lation of the

2667applicable practice act which occurred prior

2673to obtaining a license, it may enter an

2681order imposing one or m ore of the following

2690penalties:

2691(a) Refusal to certify, or to certify with

2699restrictions, an application for a license.

2705(b) Suspensi on or permanent revocation of a

2713license.

2714(c) Restriction of practice or license,

2720including, but not limited to, restricting

2726the licensee from practicing in certain

2732settings, restricting the licensee to work

2738only under designated conditions or in

2744certain settings, restricting the licensee

2749from performing or providing designated

2754clinical and administrative services,

2758restricting the licensee from practicing

2763more than a designated number of hours, or

2771any other restriction found to be necessary

2778for the protect ion of the public health,

2786safety, and welfare.

2789(d) Imposition of an administrative fine

2795not to exceed $10,000 for each count or

2804separate offense. If the violation is for

2811fraud or making a false or fraudulent

2818representation, the board, or the department

2824if there is no board, must impose a fine of

2834$10,000 per count or offense.

2840(e) Issuance of a reprimand or letter of

2848concern.

2849(f) Placement of the licensee on probation

2856for a period of time and subject to such

2865conditions as the board, or the department

2872w hen there is no board, may specify. Those

2881conditions may include, but are not limited

2888to, requiring the licensee to undergo

2894treatment, attend continuing education

2898courses, submit to be reexamined, work under

2905the supervision of another licensee, or

2911satisfy any terms which are reasonably

2917tailored to the violations found.

2922(g) Corrective action.

2925(h) Imposition of an administrative fine in

2932accordance with s. 381.0261 for violations

2938regarding patient rights.

2941(i) Refund of fees billed and collected

2948from the patient or a third party on behalf

2957of the patient.

2960(j) Requirement that the practitioner

2965undergo remedial education.

2968In determining what action is appropriate,

2974the board, or department when there is no

2982board, must first consider what sanctions

2988are nece ssary to protect the public or to

2997compensate the patient. Only after those

3003sanctions have been imposed may the

3009disciplining authority consider and include

3014in the order requirements designed to

3020rehabilitate the practitioner. All costs

3025associated with comp liance with orders

3031issued under this subsection are the

3037obligation of the practitioner.

304138. Florida Administrative Code Rule 64B16 - 30.001(2)(k)

3049sets forth disciplinary guidelines specifically applicable to a

3057violation of S ubs ection 465.016(1)(n), Florid a Statutes. The

3067rule establishes a minimum penalty of a $2,500 fine and one year

3080of probation and a maximum penalty of revocation.

308839. Florida Administrative Code Rule 64B16 - 30.001(3)(k)

3096sets forth aggravating and mitigating circumstances which may

3104suppo rt a deviation from the disciplinary guidelines. Insofar

3113as is relevant to this proceeding , the rule requires

3122consideration of the Respondent's disciplinary history as an

3130aggravating circumstance and consideration of the degree of

3138financial hardship relat ed to the imposition of fines as a

3149mitigating circumstance.

315140. As to the prior disciplinary history, the Respondent

3160was disciplined by the Petitioner in 1997. The penalty in that

3171instance included a suspension and fine and required the filing

3181of quarter ly reports. As in the 2005 disciplinary action, the

3192penalty imposed in the 1997 case was explicitly based on a

3203settlement stipulation that established the agreed penalty and

3211whic h was executed by the parties.

321841. Consideration of the Respondent 's discipl inary history

3227warrants increasing the recommended fine in this case from the

3237$2,500 minimum to $3,500 and increasing the probationary peri od

3249from one year to 18 months.

325542. As to consideration of the degree of financial

3264hardship as a result of the imposit ion of fines, the

3275Respondent's discharge of debt through bankruptcy indicates that

3283if such hardship existed at the time of the original fine and

3295assessment of costs, such hardship no longer exists.

3303RECOMMENDATION

3304Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact an d Conclusions of

3315Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Health, B oard of

3327Pharmacy , enter a f inal o rder directing that the Respondent pay a

3340total of $16,352.66, to the Petitioner. The total reflects the

3351$12,852.66 imposed by the May 3, 2005 , Final O rder and the

3364additional $3,500 penalty related to the violations set forth

3374herein. Additionally, the f inal o rder should extend the

3384Respondent's current probationary period by 18 months to be

3393served consecutively to the current probationary period.

3400DONE AN D ENTERED this 10th day of August , 2007 , in

3411Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

3415S

3416WILLIAM F. QUATTLEBAUM

3419Administrative Law Judge

3422Division of Administrative Hearings

3426The DeSoto Building

34291230 Apalachee Parkway

3432Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3060

3437(850) 488 - 9675 SUNCOM 278 - 9675

3445Fax Filing (850) 921 - 6847

3451www.doah.state.fl.us

3452Filed with the Clerk of the

3458Division of Administrative Hearings

3462this 10th day of August , 2007 .

3469COPIES FURNISHED :

3472Patrick L. Butler, Esquire

3476Billie Jo O wens, Esquire

3481Department of Health

34844052 Bald Cypress Way, Bin C - 65

3492Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3265

3497Denis R. Bousquet

35005125 Cedar Springs Drive, Unit 203

3506Naples, Florida 34110

3509Josefina M. Tamayo, General Counsel

3514Department of Health

35174052 Bald Cypress Way , Bin A02

3523Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 1701

3528Rebecca Poston, R.Ph., Executive Director

3533Board of Pharmacy

3536Department of Health

35394052 Bald Cypress Way, Bin C04

3545Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 1701

3550NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

3556All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within

356615 days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions

3577to this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that

3588will issue the Final Order in this case.

Select the PDF icon to view the document.
PDF
Date
Proceedings
PDF:
Date: 10/17/2019
Proceedings: Agency Final Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 10/17/2019
Proceedings: Agency Final Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 11/13/2007
Proceedings: Agency Final Order
PDF:
Date: 11/13/2007
Proceedings: Agency Final Order
PDF:
Date: 08/30/2007
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Response to Respondent`s Exceptions to the Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 08/10/2007
Proceedings: Recommended Order
PDF:
Date: 08/10/2007
Proceedings: Recommended Order (hearing held June 20, 2007). CASE CLOSED.
PDF:
Date: 08/10/2007
Proceedings: Recommended Order cover letter identifying the hearing record referred to the Agency.
PDF:
Date: 07/25/2007
Proceedings: Letter to Judge Quattlebaum from D. Bousquet regarding proposed recommendations filed.
PDF:
Date: 07/19/2007
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Proposed Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 07/18/2007
Proceedings: Notice of Ex-parte Communication.
PDF:
Date: 07/16/2007
Proceedings: Letter to Judge Quattlebaum from D. Bousquet regarding conclusions and reommendations for resolving cases filed.
Date: 07/09/2007
Proceedings: Transcript filed.
Date: 06/20/2007
Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
PDF:
Date: 06/18/2007
Proceedings: Respondent`s Witness and Exhibit List filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/14/2007
Proceedings: Notice of Transfer.
PDF:
Date: 06/12/2007
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Supplement to Exhitibt List filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/07/2007
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Witness and Exhibit List filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/06/2007
Proceedings: Petitioner`s Motion for Official Recognition filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/01/2007
Proceedings: Order Granting Continuance and Re-scheduling Hearing (hearing set for June 20, 2007; 9:00 a.m.; Tallahassee, FL).
PDF:
Date: 04/24/2007
Proceedings: Motion for Continuance filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/18/2007
Proceedings: Order of Pre-hearing Instructions.
PDF:
Date: 04/18/2007
Proceedings: Notice of Hearing (hearing set for June 5, 2007; 9:00 a.m.; Tallahassee, FL).
PDF:
Date: 04/18/2007
Proceedings: Order of Consolidation (DOAH Case Nos. 07-1436PL and 07-1437PL).
PDF:
Date: 04/03/2007
Proceedings: Joint Motion to Consolidate without Objection and Joint Response to Intial Order (DOAH Case Nos. 07-1436PL, 07-1437PL) filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/27/2007
Proceedings: Initial Order.
PDF:
Date: 03/27/2007
Proceedings: Election of Rights filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/27/2007
Proceedings: Administrative Complaint filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/27/2007
Proceedings: Agency referral filed.

Case Information

Judge:
WILLIAM F. QUATTLEBAUM
Date Filed:
03/27/2007
Date Assignment:
06/14/2007
Last Docket Entry:
10/17/2019
Location:
Tallahassee, Florida
District:
Northern
Agency:
ADOPTED IN TOTO
Suffix:
PL
 

Counsels

Related Florida Statute(s) (7):