09-001209PL Department Of Financial Services vs. Joan Lorraine Dragone Status: Closed Recommended Order on Friday, August 21, 2009.

Summary: Respondent is guilty of allowing a non-licensed person to act as an insurance agent, including binding insurance on a vehicle which had never been in the Florida.

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL )

SERVICES, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) Case No. 09-1209PL

)

JOAN LORRAINE DRAGONE, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursuant to notice, a formal hearing was held in this case

before Larry J. Sartin, an Administrative Law Judge of the

Division of Administrative Hearings, on May 13, 2009, by video

teleconference between sites in Lauderdale Lakes and

Tallahassee, Florida.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: David J. Busch, Senior Attorney

Division of Legal Services

Department of Financial Services

612 Larson Building

200 East Gaines Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0333

For Respondent: Christopher A. Grillo, Esquire

One East Broward Boulevard, Suite 700

Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES

The issues in this case are whether Respondent, Joan

Lorraine Dragone, committed the offenses alleged in an Amended

Administrative Complaint, issued by Petitioner, the Department

of Financial Services and, if so, what penalty should be

imposed.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

On or about August 14, 2007, Petitioner issued a one-count

Administrative Complaint, Petitioner's Case No. 87611-07-AG,

alleging that Joan Lorraine Dragone had violated certain

statutory provisions governing the conduct of Florida insurance

agents. On or about August 31, 2007, Respondent executed an

Election of Rights form which she filed with Petitioner

requesting a formal hearing to contest the allegations of fact

contained in the Administrative Complaint.

A copy of the Administrative Complaint and Respondent’s

Election of Rights form were filed by Petitioner with the

Division of Administrative Hearings on September 12, 2007. The

matter was designated DOAH Case No. 07-4138PL and was assigned

to the undersigned.

On February 26, 2008, the file in DOAH Case No. 07-41389PL

was closed and jurisdiction was relinquished to Petitioner

because of criminal charges which were pending against

Respondent. Those charges prevented Respondent from effectively

defending against the charges in this case until the criminal

charges were disposed of.

On March 6, 2009, Petitioner filed Petitioner’s Motion to

Reassume Jurisdiction and Reset Final Hearing. Petitioner

represented that the criminal proceedings had been concluded.

Petitioner also filed an Amended Administrative Complaint dated

March 6, 2009. The Amended Administrative Complaint added an

additional count to the original Administrative Complaint. The

matter was reopened as DOAH Case No. 09-1209PL.

By Notice of Hearing by Video Teleconference entered

March 20, 2009, the final hearing was scheduled for May 13,

2009.

At the final hearing Petitioner presented the testimony of

Hemchand Parmanand, Jose Corilloclla, Delphia Guerra, and John

Howard Swope. Petitioner had 12 Exhibits admitted, including

the deposition testimony of Suresh Parmanand. Respondent

testified on her own behalf and had three Exhibits admitted.

The two-volume Transcript of the final hearing was filed on

June 1, 2009. By Notice of Filing Transcript issued the same

day, the parties were informed that their proposed recommended

orders were due on or before June 29, 2009. On June 12, 2009,

Petitioner filed a Motion for Extension of Time to File Proposed

Recommended Order. That Motion was granted, extending the time

for filing proposed recommended orders to July 28, 2009.

On July 27, 2009, Petitioner filed a Proposed Recommended

Order. This post-hearing submittal has been fully considered in

rendering this Recommended Order. No post-hearing submittal has

been filed for Respondent.

On August 3, 2009, counsel for Respondent filed a Motion to

Withdraw. That Motion was granted by Order entered August 13,

2009.

The events at issue in this case were alleged to have taken

place between 2002 and 2005, primarily in 2004. All references

to the Florida Statutes will be to the codification applicable

at the time the event at issue took place unless otherwise

noted.

FINDINGS OF FACT

A. The Parties .

1. Petitioner, the Department of Financial Services

(hereinafter referred to as the "Department"), is the agency of

the State of Florida charged with the responsibility for, among

other things, the investigation and prosecution of complaints

against individuals licensed to conduct insurance business in

Florida. Ch. 626, Fla. Stat.

2. Respondent Joan Lorraine Dragone is currently and was

at the times relevant, licensed in Florida as a Health (2-40)

and General Lines (Property & Casualty)(2-20) insurance agent.

Ms. Dragone was first licensed in December 1992.

3. Ms. Dragone’s license identification number is A071793.

4. At all relevant times, Ms. Dragone operated and owned

All Neighbors Discount Insurance, Inc. (hereinafter referred to

director of All Neighbors. All Neighbors’ principal address is

7116 Stirling Road, Davie, Florida 33024.

5. Ms. Dragone, who was first licensed by the Department

in December 1992, has worked in the insurance business for

approximately 23 years. Part of that time she worked with her

sister, Nancy Rice, who also became a licensed insurance agent.

Ms. Rice left All Neighbors in April 2004.

B. Employment of Jose Corilloclla .

6. Sometime in 1997, Jose Corilloclla, a native of Peru,

was employed at All Neighbors. Mr. Corilloclla, who was an

illegal alien at the time, was paid weekly in cash at an hourly

rate of $6.00. Although Ms. Dragone denied knowledge of Mr.

Corilloclla’s status and employment, it is inferred that she had

knowledge that he was not legally in the United States.

7. Initially, Mr. Corilloclla was employed as a file clerk

and to do odd jobs for All Neighbors. Mr. Corilloclla also

acted as an interpreter of Spanish-speaking customers for All

Neighbors.

8. After Ms. Rice’s departure in April 2004,

Mr. Corilloclla was employed full-time at All Neighbors until

his departure in 2005. Ms. Dragone was his only supervisor

during this time.

9. While directly under Ms. Dragone’s supervision,

Mr. Corilloclla usually arrived at the office at about 10:00

a.m. and departed at about 6:00 p.m. On most days, Ms. Dragone

began work at approximately 11:00 to 11:30 a.m. On occasion,

Ms. Dragone did not arrive until noon. Ms. Dragone also, on

occasion, would leave the office for an hour or more during the

afternoon. On all of these occasions, Mr. Corilloclla was left

alone, unsupervised, at All Neighbors.

10. From at least April 2004 until his departure,

Mr. Corilloclla’s duties at All Neighbors increased

dramatically. Mr. Corilloclla answered the telephone and met

with customers, describing the benefits of insurance coverage,

giving interpretations of insurance coverage and/or policies,

describing the terms of insurance coverage, including premiums,

inviting customers to contract for insurance, quoting premiums

and binding coverage, recommending insurance options, and

completing applications. Mr. Corilloclla also conducted vehicle

inspections. Mr. Corilloclla generally held himself out to be

an insurance agent.

11. At some time after April 2004, Ms. Dragone encouraged

Mr. Corilloclla to obtain an insurance license. While

Mr. Corilloclla began the process of obtaining a license,

completing approximately eight of a 40-hour insurance agent

course, he did not complete the process. As the agent in

charge, Ms. Dragone agreed to supervise Mr. Corilloclla during

the process of obtaining his license.

12. Ms. Dragone’s testimony that Mr. Corilloclla’s

activities after April 2004 were limited to those for which she

fully supervised him was not credible. Mr. Corilloclla, having

been with All Neighbors since 1997, had learned how the business

operated and Ms. Dragone simply allowed him to operate as if he

were already an insurance agent, essentially unsupervised.

C. Suresh Parmanand’s Automobile Insurance Purchase .

13. In 2002, Suresh Parmanand (hereinafter referred to as

“Suresh”), a resident of New York, purchased a 2002 Mercedes-

Benz S430 (hereinafter referred to as the “Vehicle”) from

somewhere in Virginia (Suresh was unable to recall where exactly

in Virginia the purchase took place). The Vehicle was a used

one.

14. Suresh decided to insure the Vehicle in Florida, at

least in part, because of lower insurance rates than he could

obtain in New York.

15. Utilizing his brother’s name, Hemchand Parmanand

(hereinafter referred to as “Hemchand”), and his brother’s

Florida address, Suresh obtained insurance for the Vehicle

through All Neighbors. Suresh insured the Vehicle by telephone

conversations with Mr. Corilloclla, who also obtained a Florida

title in the name of Hemcharnd for the Vehicle for Suresh.

16. After speaking with Mr. Corilloclla by telephone about

insuring the Vehicle, Mr. Corilloclla, who was fully aware that

the vehicle was located in New York, had never been in Florida,

and would not be located in Florida, completed an application

for insurance from Gainsco Insurance Group (hereinafter referred

to as “Gainsco”).

17. Mr. Corilloclla filled out a Gainsco application for

insurance on the Vehicle, signing it with Hemchand’s name as

applicant, Ms. Dragone’s name as agent, and binding the

insurance effective December 18, 2004. While an explanation as

to why it took approximately two years to bind the coverage was

given, like many issues surrounding Suresh’s questionable

automobile insurance dealings, that explanation was not

convincing enough on which to make a finding.

18. Mr. Corilloclla also completed a Vehicle Pre-insurance

No inspection was ever conducted by Mr. Corilloclla or Ms.

Dragone.

19. Suresh paid for the insurance with three separate,

sequentially numbered checks dated the same day and all made

payable to Mr. Corilloclla. Mr. Corilloclla deposited those

checks into his personal bank account, keeping part of the

payments (approximately $200.00) for himself, and placed the

premium with the application for insurance at All Neighbors.

20. The application and premium were processed by

Ms. Dragone. While the evidence failed to prove clearly and

convincingly that Ms. Dragone was fully aware of the nature of

this transaction, she was aware that Mr. Corilloclla had

obtained the insurance and had signed the documentation on her

behalf.

21. Ms. Dragone, at the time of the foregoing transaction,

had an agency agreement with National Specialty Lines, the

Managing General Agent subsidiary of Gainsco. Pursuant to that

agreement, Ms. Dragone was appointed and authorized to solicit

and submit applications for insurance, and to deliver policies

and binders consistent with the insurance company’s underwriting

guidelines. Those guidelines limited the binding of coverage to

Ms. Dragone and required that she conduct the vehicle inspection

and complete and sign the inspection form. Ms. Dragone did not

comply with either of these requirements.

22. Ultimately, the Vehicle was allegedly involved in an

accident for which Suresh submitted an insurance claim. As a

result of the claim, an investigation was begun by Gainsco

Insurance Group which led to the discovery that the Vehicle had

been fraudulently insured.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

A. Jurisdiction .

23. The Division of Administrative Hearings has

jurisdiction over the subject matter of this proceeding and of

the parties thereto pursuant to Sections 120.569 and 120.57(1),

Florida Statutes (2009).

B. The Burden and Standard of Proof .

24. The Department seeks to impose penalties against

Ms. Dragone through the Amended Administrative Complaint that

includes mandatory and discretionary suspension or revocation of

her licenses. Therefore, the Department has the burden of

proving the specific allegations of fact that support its

charges by clear and convincing evidence. See Department of

Banking and Finance, Division of Securities and Investor

Protection v. Osborne Stern and Co. , 670 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 1996);

Ferris v. Turlington , 510 So. 2d 292 (Fla. 1987); and Pou v.

Department of Insurance and Treasurer , 707 So. 2d 941 (Fla. 3d

DCA 1998).

25. What constitutes "clear and convincing" evidence was

described by the court in Evans Packing Co. v. Department of

Agriculture and Consumer Services , 550 So. 2d 112, 116, n. 5

(Fla. 1st DCA 1989), as follows:

. . . [C]lear and convincing evidence

requires that the evidence must be found to

be credible; the facts to which the

witnesses testify must be distinctly

remembered; the evidence must be precise and

explicit and the witnesses must be lacking

in confusion as to the facts in issue. The

evidence must be of such weight that it

produces in the mind of the trier of fact

the firm belief or conviction, without

hesitancy, as to the truth of the

allegations sought to be established.

Slomowitz v. Walker , 429 So. 2d 797, 800

(Fla. 4th DCA 1983).

See also In re Graziano , 696 So. 2d 744 (Fla. 1997); In re

Davey , 645 So. 2d 398 (Fla. 1994); and Walker v. Florida

Department of Business and Professional Regulation , 705 So. 2d

652 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998)(Sharp, J., dissenting).

C. The Department's Charges .

26. Section 626.611, Florida Statutes, mandates that the

Department suspend or revoke the license of any insurance agent

if it finds that the agent has committed any of a number of acts

specified in that Section.

27. Section 626.621, Florida Statutes, gives the

Department the discretion to suspend or revoke the license of

any insurance agent if it finds that the agent has committed any

of a number of acts specified in that Section.

28. The Amended Administrative Complaint in this case

contains two counts. In Count I, it is alleged that Ms. Dragone

violated the following statutory provisions: Sections

626.611(7) and (9), Florida Statutes, and 626.621(6),Florida

Statutes.

29. In Count II, it is alleged that Ms. Dragone committed

the following disciplinable offenses: Section 626.611(7), (8),

and (13), Florida Statutes; and Section 662.621(2), (3), and

(12), Florida Statutes. Some of those offenses are predicated

upon the alleged failure of Ms. Dragone to adhere to the

requirements of other statutory and rule provisions, in

particular: Section 626.0428, Florida Statutes (Count II (d));

II (a), (b), and (c)); Section 626.611(7), (8), and (13),

and Florida Administrative Code Rule 69B-222.060 (Count II (d)).

D. Count I ( Suresh Parmanand’s Automobile Insurance

Purchase) .

30. Section 626.611, Florida Statutes, provides, relevant

to Count I, the following:

The department shall . . . suspend, revoke,

or refuse to renew or continue the license

or appointment of any applicant, agent,

title agency, adjuster, customer

representative, service representative, or

managing general agent, and it shall suspend

or revoke the eligibility to hold a license

or appointment of any such person, if it

finds that as to the applicant, licensee, or

appointee any one or more of the following

applicable grounds exist:

. . . .

(7) Demonstrated lack of fitness or

trustworthiness to engage in the business of

insurance.

. . . .

(9) Fraudulent or dishonest practices in

the conduct of business under the license or

appointment.

31. Section 626.621(6), Florida Statutes, provides,

relevant to Count I:

The department may, in its discretion, deny

an application for, suspend, revoke, or

refuse to renew or continue the license or

appointment of any applicant, agent,

adjuster, customer representative, service

representative, or managing general agent,

and it may suspend or revoke the eligibility

to hold a license or appointment of any such

person, if it finds that as to the

applicant, licensee, or appointee any one or

more of the following applicable grounds

exist under circumstances for which such

denial, suspension, revocation, or refusal

is not mandatory under s. 626.611:

(6) In the conduct of business under the

license or appointment, engaging in unfair

methods of competition or in unfair or

deceptive acts or practices, as prohibited

under part IX of this chapter, or having

otherwise shown himself or herself to be a

source of injury or loss to the public or

detrimental to the public interest.

. . . .

32. The evidence in this case proved clearly and

convincingly that Mr. Corilloclla fraudulently placed insurance

on the Vehicle, knowing that the Vehicle was located outside the

State of Florida, without inspecting it, and by fraudulently

completing and signing the documentation necessary to obtain the

insurance. Clearly, Mr. Corilloclla’s conduct, were he a

licensed agent, would have constituted a violation of Section

626.611(7) and (9), Florida Statutes. The evidence also proved

that his conduct would have constituted a violation of Section

626.621(6), Florida Statutes.

33. As an employee under the direct and sole supervision

of Ms. Dragone, Mr. Corilloclla’s conduct is attributable to her

pursuant to Section 626.734, Florida Statutes:

Corporations, liability of agent. --Any

general lines insurance agent who is an

officer, director, or stockholder of an

incorporated general lines insurance agency

shall remain personally and fully liable and

accountable for any wrongful acts,

misconduct, or violations of any provisions

of this code committed by such licensee or by

any person under his or her direct

supervision and control while acting on

behalf of the corporation. Nothing in this

section shall be construed to render any

person criminally liable or subject to any

disciplinary proceedings for any act unless

such person personally committed or knew or

should have known of such act and of the

facts constituting a violation of this

chapter.

34. Pursuant to the foregoing provision, Ms. Dragone is,

as the only agent who was an officer or director of All

Neighbors, “personally and fully liable and accountable for any

wrongful acts, misconduct, or violations of any provisions of

this code” committed by Mr. Corilloclla.

35. Additionally, the evidence proved clearly and

convincingly that Ms. Dragone’s own conduct demonstrated a “lack

of fitness or trustworthiness to engage in the business of

insurance” in violation of Section 626.611(7), Florida Statutes.

36. The evidence failed to prove that Ms. Dragone

personally violated Section 626.611(9) or 626.621(6), Florida

Statutes. The evidence simply failed to prove that she was

aware of Mr. Corilloclla’s fraudulent placement of insurance on

the Vehicle. It cannot, therefore, be found that she acted with

the same fraudulent or dishonest intent as Mr. Corilloclla.

37. Based upon the foregoing, it is concluded that

Ms. Dragone, as alleged in Count I of the Amended Administrative

Complaint, violated Section 626.611(7), Florida Statutes, by her

own conduct, and, pursuant to Section 626.734, Florida Statutes,

is responsible for Mr. Corilloclla’s violations of Sections

626.611(7) and (9), and 626.621(6), Florida Statutes

E. Count II ( Employment of Jose Corilloclla) .

38. Section 626.611, Florida Statutes, provides, relevant

to Count II, the following grounds for discipline:

(7) Demonstrated lack of fitness or

trustworthiness to engage in the business of

insurance.

(8) Demonstrated lack of reasonably

adequate knowledge and technical competence

to engage in the transactions authorized by

the license or appointment.

. . . .

(13) Willful failure to comply with, or

willful violation of, any proper order or

rule of the department or willful violation

of any provision of this code.

39. Section 626.621, Florida Statutes, provides, relevant

to Count II, the following grounds for discipline:

(2) Violation of any provision of this

code or of any other law applicable to the

business of insurance in the course of

dealing under the license or appointment.

(3) Violation of any lawful order or rule

of the department, commission, or office.

. . . .

(12) Knowingly aiding, assisting,

procuring, advising, or abetting any person

in the violation of or to violate a

provision of the insurance code or any order

or rule of the department, commission, or

office.

40. The evidence proved clearly and convincingly that, due

to her inadequate supervision of Mr. Corilloclla, Ms. Dragone

violated Sections 626.611(7) and 626.621(12), Florida Statutes.

The evidence failed to prove, however, that she violated Section

626.611(8), Florida Statutes.

41. The evidence also proved clearly and convincingly

that, due to her own conduct, Ms. Dragone violated Sections

626.611(7) and 626.621(12), Florida Statutes. The evidence

failed to prove, however, that she violated Section 626.611(8),

Florida Statutes.

42. Whether Ms. Dragone committed the other alleged

violations of Count II (Sections 626.611(13) and 626.621(2) and

(3), Florida Statutes) is dependent upon whether she failed to

comply with the provisions of statutes and rules alleged in the

Amended Administrative Complaint, or allowed Mr. Corilloclla to

fail to comply with those cited provisions.

42. In support of the allegation of Count II that

Ms. Dragone violated Sections 626.611(13) and 626.621(2) and

(3), Florida Statutes, it is first alleged that she violated

Section 626.112(1) and (2), Florida Statutes, which provides:

(1)(a) No person may be, act as, or

advertise or hold himself or herself out to

be an insurance agent, insurance adjuster,

or customer representative unless he or she

is currently licensed by the department and

appointed by an appropriate appointing

entity or person.

(b) Except as provided in subsection (6) or

in applicable department rules, and in

addition to other conduct described in this

chapter with respect to particular types of

agents, a license as an insurance agent,

service representative, customer

representative, or limited customer

representative is required in order to

engage in the solicitation of insurance. For

purposes of this requirement, as applicable

to any of the license types described in

this section, the solicitation of insurance

is the attempt to persuade any person to

purchase an insurance product by:

1. Describing the benefits or terms of

insurance coverage, including premiums or

rates of return;

2. Distributing an invitation to contract

to prospective purchasers;

3. Making general or specific

recommendations as to insurance products;

4. Completing orders or applications for

insurance products;

5. Comparing insurance products, advising

as to insurance matters, or interpreting

policies or coverages; or

6. Offering or attempting to negotiate on

behalf of another person a viatical

settlement contract as defined in s.

626.9911.

(2) No agent or customer representative

shall solicit or otherwise transact as agent

or customer representative, or represent or

hold himself or herself out to be an agent

or customer representative as to, any kind

or kinds of insurance as to which he or she

is not then licensed and appointed.

43. Secondly, it is alleged that Ms. Dragone failed to

comply with the requirements of Section 626.0428, Florida

Statutes, which provides:

Agency personnel powers, duties, and

limitations.—

(1) An individual employed by an agent or

agency on salary who devotes full time to

clerical work, with incidental taking of

insurance applications or quoting or

receiving premiums on incoming inquiries in

the office of the agent or agency, is not

deemed to be an agent or customer

representative if his or her compensation

does not include in whole or in part any

commissions on such business and is not

related to the production of applications,

insurance, or premiums.

(2) No employee of an agent or agency may

bind insurance coverage unless licensed and

appointed as a general lines agent or

customer representative.

(3) No employee of an agent or agency may

initiate contact with any person for the

purpose of soliciting insurance unless

licensed and appointed as a general lines

agent or customer representative.

44. Thirdly, it is alleged that Ms. Dragone failed to

comply with the requirements of Florida Administrative Code Rule

69B-222.060, which provides:

Unlawful Activities by Unlicensed Insurance

Agency Personnel.

The following actions are never allowable by

unlicensed personnel.

(1) Comparing insurance products;

advising as to insurance needs or insurance

matters; or interpreting policies or

coverages.

(2) Binding new, additional, or

replacement coverage for new or existing

customers; or binding coverage on or

recording additional property under existing

policies.

(3) Soliciting the sale of insurance by

telephone, in person, or by other

communication. However, the unlicensed

person may telephone persons to set

appointments for licensed and appointed

agents, customer representatives, or

solicitors, or to obtain basic policy

information as to existing insurance

coverage. The unlicensed person may not

engage in a substantive discussion of

insurance products.

45. Fourthly, it is alleged that Ms. Dragone failed to

comply with the requirements of Section 626.7315, Florida

Statutes, which provides:

Prohibition against the unlicensed

transaction of general lines insurance. --

With respect to any line of authority as

defined in s. 626.015 (5), no individual

shall, unless licensed as a general lines

agent:

(1) Solicit insurance or procure

applications therefor;

(2) In this state, receive or issue a

receipt for any money on account of or for

any insurer, or receive or issue a receipt

for money from other persons to be

transmitted to any insurer for a policy,

contract, or certificate of insurance or any

renewal thereof, even though the policy,

certificate, or contract is not signed by

him or her as agent or representative of the

insurer, except as provided in s.

626.0428 (1);

(3) Directly or indirectly represent

himself or herself to be an agent of any

insurer or as an agent, to collect or

forward any insurance premium, or to

solicit, negotiate, effect, procure,

receive, deliver, or forward, directly or

indirectly, any insurance contract or

renewal thereof or any endorsement relating

to an insurance contract, or attempt to

effect the same, of property or insurable

business activities or interests, located in

this state;

(4) In this state, engage or hold himself

or herself out as engaging in the business

of analyzing or abstracting insurance

policies or of counseling or advising or

giving opinions, other than as a licensed

attorney at law, relative to insurance or

insurance contracts, for fee, commission, or

other compensation, other than as a salaried

bona fide full-time employee so counseling

and advising his or her employer relative to

the insurance interests of the employer and

of the subsidiaries or business affiliates

of the employer;

(5) In any way, directly or indirectly,

make or cause to be made, or attempt to make

or cause to be made, any contract of

insurance for or on account of any insurer;

(6) Solicit, negotiate, or in any way,

directly or indirectly, effect insurance

contracts, if a member of a partnership or

association, or a stockholder, officer, or

agent of a corporation which holds an agency

appointment from any insurer; or

(7) Receive or transmit applications for

suretyship, or receive for delivery bonds

founded on applications forwarded from this

state, or otherwise procure suretyship to be

effected by a surety insurer upon the bonds

of persons in this state or upon bonds given

to persons in this state.

46. The evidence proved clearly and convincingly that

Mr. Corilloclla committed most, if not all, of the acts

prohibited in Section 626.112(1) and (2), Florida Statutes;

Section 626.0428(2) and (3), Florida Statutes; Florida

Administrative Code Rule 69B-222.060; and Section 626.7315,

Florida Statutes. The commitment of those prohibited acts in

turn constitutes a violation of Sections 626.611(13) and

626.621(2) and (3), Florida Statutes.

47. The evidence also proved clearly and convincingly that

Ms. Dragone, by her lack of supervision, allowed Mr. Corilloclla

to commit the foregoing prohibited acts. Pursuant to Section

626.734, Florida Statutes, as Mr. Corilloclla’s supervising

agent, Ms. Dragone is therefore responsible for

Mr. Corilloclla’s violations of statutes and rules.

48. Based upon the foregoing, it is concluded that Ms.

Dragone, as alleged in Count II of the Amended Administrative

Complaint, violated Sections 626.611(7) and 626.621(12), Florida

Statutes, by her own conduct, and, pursuant to Section 626.734,

Florida Statutes, is responsible for Mr. Corilloclla’s

violations of Section 626.611(7), Florida Statutes. She is also

responsible for his failure to adhere to Sections 626.0428,

626.112(1) and (2), 626.611(7), and 626.7315, Florida Statutes,

and Florida Administrative Rule 69B-222.060, which in turn,

constitutes a violation of Sections 626.611(13) and 626.621(2)

and (3), Florida Statutes.

F. The Appropriate Penalty .

49. The appropriate penalty to be imposed upon Ms. Dragone

is governed by Florida Administrative Code Rule Chapter 69B-231.

The Department, in its Proposed Recommended Order, has

adequately and correctly discussed the appropriate penalty in

this case, a suspension of Ms. Dragone’s license of between 18

and 24 months.

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

Law, it is RECOMMENDED that a final order be entered by the

Department finding that Joan Lorraine Dragone violated the

provisions of Chapter 626, Florida Statutes, described more

fully in this Recommended Order; dismissing all other charges;

and suspending her license and appointment for a period of

between 18 and 24 months.

DONE AND ENTERED this 21st day of August, 2009, in

Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

___________________________________

LARRY J. SARTIN

Administrative Law Judge

Division of Administrative Hearings

The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060

[phone] SUNCOM 278-9675

Fax Filing [phone]

www.doah.state.fl.us

Filed with the Clerk of the

Division of Administrative Hearings

this day 21st day of August, 2009.

COPIES FURNISHED:

David J. Busch, Senior Attorney

Division of Legal Services

Department of Financial Services

612 Larson Building

200 East Gaines Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0333

Joan Lorraine Dragone

3100 Southwest 20 Court

Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33312

Tracey Beal, Agency Clerk

Department of Financial Services

200 East Gaines Street

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0390

Honorable Alex Sink

Chief Financial Officer

Department of Financial Services

The Capitol, Plaza Level 11

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0300

Benjamin Diamond, General Counsel

Department of Financial Services

The Capitol, Plaza Level 11

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0307

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

All parties have the right 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.