10-001849 Andrea Crump vs. The Majestic Tower At Bal Harbour Status: Closed Recommended Order on Tuesday, July 6, 2010.

Summary: Recommended that housing discrimination complaint be dismissed where complainant, who bore burden of proof, did not appear at hearing and therefore did not present any evidence in support of her allegations of discrimination.

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

ANDREA CRUMP, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) Case No. 10-1849

)

THE MAJESTIC TOWER )

AT BAL HARBOUR, )

)

Respondent. )

_________________________________)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursuant to notice, a hearing was conducted in this case on

July 2, 2010, by video teleconference at sites in Miami and

Tallahassee, Florida, before Stuart M. Lerner, a duly-designated

Administrative Law Judge of the Division of Administrative

Hearings (DOAH).

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: No appearance

For Respondent: Benjamin M. Esco, Esquire

Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A.

1645 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard

Second Floor

West Palm Beach, Florida 33401

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

Whether Respondent committed the discriminatory housing

practice alleged in Petitioner's Housing Discrimination

Complaint and, if so, what relief should Petitioner be granted.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

Petitioner filed a Housing Discrimination Complaint

(Complaint) against Respondent in January 2010. On March 23,

2010, the Florida Commission on Human Relations (Commission),

through its Executive Director, issued a Determination of No

Cause, advising that, following an investigation, the Commission

had "determined that reasonable cause d[id] not exist to believe

that a discriminatory housing practice ha[d] occurred."

On April 5, 2010, Petitioner filed with the Commission a

Petition for Relief (Petition). The Commission transmitted the

Petition to DOAH on April 8, 2010.

The final hearing in the instant case was scheduled by

video teleconference at sites in Miami and Tallahassee for

July 2, 2010, commencing at 9:00 a.m. Petitioner and Respondent

were provided with written notice of the scheduled hearing in

accordance with Section 120.569(2)(b), Florida Statutes. Such

notice was in the form of a Notice of Hearing by Video

Teleconference mailed on April 20, 2010, to Petitioner and to

Respondent's counsel of record, Benjamin Esco, Esquire.

Respondent appeared at the hearing, which was held as

scheduled on July 2, 2010, through its counsel of record,

Mr. Esco. Petitioner, on the other hand, did not make an

appearance at the hearing, either in person or through counsel

or any other authorized representative.

After waiting approximately 50 minutes for Petitioner to

appear, and not having heard from her, the undersigned went on

the record. Mr. Esco, on behalf of Respondent, declined to

present any evidence, arguing, persuasively, that it was

Petitioner, not Respondent, who had the burden of proof and that

therefore Petitioner's failure to appear at the hearing and

offer evidence in support of her allegations of discrimination

should result in the Commission's dismissing Petitioner's

Complaint and Petition. The undersigned indicated that he

agreed and that he would issue an order recommending that the

Commission take such action. The hearing was thereupon

concluded.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Because no evidence was offered at the final hearing

held in the instant case, no findings of fact are made.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

2. DOAH has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this

proceeding and of the parties hereto pursuant to Chapter 120,

Florida Statutes.

3. Florida's Fair Housing Act (Act) is codified in

Sections 760.20 through 760.37, Florida Statutes.

4. Among other things, the Act makes certain acts

"discriminatory housing practices" and gives the Commission the

authority, if it finds (following an administrative hearing

conducted by an administrative law judge) that such a

"discriminatory housing practice" has occurred, to issue an

order "prohibiting the practice" and providing "affirmative

relief from the effects of the practice, including quantifiable

damages and reasonable attorney's fees and costs."

§ 760.35(3)(b), Fla. Stat.

5. In the instant case, Petitioner has claimed, in her

Complaint and Petition, that she was the victim of a

discriminatory housing practice committed by Respondent.

6. Pursuant to Section 760.34(5), Florida Statutes, it was

Petitioner's burden to prove at the final hearing held in this

matter that this discriminatory housing practice in fact

occurred.

7. Petitioner, however, failed to make an appearance at

the hearing and present any evidence in support of her

allegations of discrimination, despite having been afforded

proper notice of the hearing.

8. Accordingly, Petitioner's Complaint and Petition must

be dismissed.

RECOMMENDATION

Based upon the foregoing, it is hereby

RECOMMENDED that the Commission issue a Final Order

dismissing Petitioner's Complaint and Petition.

DONE AND ENTERED this 6th day of July, 2010, in

Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

S

___________________________________

STUART M. LERNER

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 6th day of July, 2010.

COPIES FURNISHED :

Denise Crawford, Agency Clerk

Florida Commission on Human Relations

2009 Apalachee Parkway, Suite 100

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Larry Kranert, General Counsel

Florida Commission on Human Relations

2009 Apalachee Parkway, Suite 100

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Benjamin M. Esco, Esquire

Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A.

1645 Palm Beach Lakes Boulevard

Second Floor

West Palm Beach, Florida 33401

Andrea Crump

9601 Collins Avenue, Apt. 906

Bal Harbour, Florida 33154

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.