11-002270
Florida Commission On Human Relations, On Behalf Of Steven And Jamie Terry vs.
Hoyt And Nancy Davis, Florida Coastal Jacksonville Realty, Inc., And John Mcmenamy
Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Wednesday, May 30, 2012.
Recommended Order on Wednesday, May 30, 2012.
1STATE OF FLORIDA
4DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS
8FLORIDA COMMISSION ON HUMAN ) )
14RELATIONS, ON BEHALF OF STEVEN )
20AND JAMIE TERRY, )
24Petitioner, )
26)
27vs. ) Case No. 11-2270
32)
33HOYT AND NANCY DAVIS, FLORIDA )
39COASTAL JACKSONVILLE REALTY, )
43INC., AND JOHN MCMENAMY, )
48)
49Respondents. )
51)
52RECOMMENDED ORDER
54Pursuant to notice, a final hearing was held in this case
65on November 29, 2011, in Jacksonville, Florida, before W. David
75Watkins, a designated Administrative Law Judge of the Division
84of Administrative Hearings.
87APPEARANCES
88For Petitioners: David A. Organes, Esquire
94Florida Commission on Human Relations
992009 Apalachee Parkway, Suite 100
104Tallahassee, Florida 32301
107For Respondents Hoyt and Nancy Davis:
113Geoffrey T. Heekin, Esquire,
117Hilary Wilson, Esquire
120One Independent Drive, Suite 2200
125Jacksonville, Florida 32202
128For Respondents John McMenamy and Florida Coastal
135Jacksonville Realty, Inc.:
138N. Mark New, II, Esquire
143McGlinchey Stafford, PLLC
14610407 Centurion Parkway North, Suite 200
152Jacksonville, Florida 32256
155STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE
159Whether Respondents engaged in a discriminatory housing
166practice in violation of the Florida Fair Housing Act, as
176amended, sections 760.20 through 760.37, Florida Statutes
183(2011) 1 / .
187PRELIMINARY STATEMENT
189Petitioner, the Florida Commission on Human Relations
196("Commission"), is a state agency charged with investigating
206complaints of housing discrimination filed pursuant to the
214Florida Fair Housing Act. §§ 760.22 - 760.37, Fla. Stat.
224On August 16, 2010, Steven and Jaime Terry filed a complaint
235with the Commission dual-filed with the U.S. Department of
245Housing and Urban Development -- alleging Respondents, Hoyt and
254Nancy Davis, John McMenamy, and Florida Coastal Jacksonville
262Realty, Inc., discriminated against them on the basis of
271familial status in violation of section 760.23(1), Florida
279Statutes, and section 804(a) of the Federal Fair Housing Act of
2901988. 42 U.S.C. § 3604(a).
295An investigation of the complaint was made by the
304Commission. On September 17, 2010, the Commission issued its
313determination that there was reasonable cause to believe a
322discriminatory housing practice had occurred in violation of
330section 760.23(1). The Commission's efforts to conciliate were
338unsuccessful, as stated in the Notice of Failure of Conciliation
348entered by the Commission on April 26, 2011. Mr. and Mrs. Terry
360elected to have the Commission act on their behalf pursuant to
371section 760.35(3)(a) Florida Administrative Code Rule 60Y-
3787.001(8)(b)7. On May 5, 2011, the Commission filed a petition
388for relief on behalf of Mr. and Mrs. Terry.
397On May 5, 2011, the case was referred to the Division of
409Administrative Hearings ("DOAH") and assigned to Administrative
418Law Judge Lawrence P. Stevenson to conduct a formal hearing on
429the matter. However, on July 12, 2011, the case was transferred
440to the undersigned, and on September 19, 2011, an Order Granting
451Continuance and Re-scheduling Hearing was issued setting the
459final hearing for November 29 and 30, 2011, in Jacksonville, Florida. The final hearing was conducted as noticed, at which time
480Petitioners called as witnesses Jamie Terry, John McMenamy and
489Nancy Davis, and offered in evidence nine exhibits. Respondents
498Hoyt and Nancy Davis recalled Nancy Davis as its sole witness,
509and offered four exhibits in evidence. Respondents John McMenamy
518and Florida Coastal Jacksonville Realty, Inc. called Hoyt Davis
527as their only witness, and offered one exhibit in evidence.
537At the conclusion of the final hearing, the parties
546stipulated that proposed recommended orders would be filed
554within 14 days of the filing of the two-volume official
564transcript with the Division, which occurred on January 18,
5732012. Thereafter the parties filed two separate requests for
582extensions of time to file proposed recommended orders, and
591those requests were granted. On March 5, 2012, Petitioners and
601Respondents Hoyt and Nancy Davis timely filed Proposed
609Recommended Orders, both of which have been carefully considered
618by the undersigned.
621Based on the testimony and documentary evidence presented
629at hearing, the demeanor and credibility of the witnesses, and
639on the entire record of this proceeding, the following findings
649of fact are made:
653FINDINGS OF FACT
656Background
6571. Respondents Hoyt and Nancy Davis (the Davises) own a
667residential property located at 1856 Cross Pointe Way,
675St. Augustine, Florida (the Property). The Property is utilized
684exclusively as a rental.
6882. Respondent Florida Coastal Jacksonville Realty, Inc.
695("Florida Coastal") and its principal John McMenamy ("McMenamy")
707acted as listing agents for the Property (collectively, the
"716Broker Respondents"). Mr. McMenamy and his company have
725managed the rental of the Property for approximately six years.
7353. In association with their listing of the Property, the
745Broker Respondents were responsible for advertising, showing,
752accepting applications for and assisting in the selection of
761tenants for the Property.
7654. At the time of the events in question, the Property was
777being offered for lease at a rate of $1,450 per month.
789Generally, due to its location within a St. Johns County golf
800community and proximity to good schools, the Property rents
809easily and quickly.
812The Rental Applications
8155. On May 14, 2010, Petitioner Jaime Terry (Mrs. Terry)
825contacted McMenamy regarding the Property. McMenamy instructed
832Mrs. Terry on the rental application process. On the afternoon
842of Sunday, May 16, 2010, Petitioners submitted via e-mail their
852rental application, dated May 15, 2010.
8586. On their application, the Petitioners disclosed that
866they had previously declared bankruptcy. The bankruptcy was
874entered in December 2007 and discharged in January 2009.
883Petitioners also disclosed that they were currently living with
892Mrs. Terry's parents. The application included a statement of
901the Terrys' monthly income, and also disclosed that they had
911three children residing with them -- aged eleven, five and two
922at the time. A memo attached to the application elaborated on
933the bankruptcy and other details of their employment and
942financial situation. Mrs. Terry testified that during the
950application process the Respondents did not solicit additional
958information concerning her employment history.
9637. On May 18, 2010, McMenamy ran a credit check on the
975Terrys using the "Online Rental Exchange." The credit report
984for Jaime Terry reflected a credit score of 664, while Steven
995Terry's assigned score was 649. However, both reports noted
"1004conditional" approval because of the bankruptcy filing.
10118. Although the exact date is unknown, at approximately
1020the same time that the Terrys submitted their application,
1029another couple, Rick and Jessica Egger (the Eggers) contacted
1038McMenamy regarding their interest in possibly renting the
1046Property.
10479. On the evening of Thursday, May 20, 2010, the Eggers
1058formally submitted an application to rent the Property. The
1067Eggers' application disclosed that, unlike the Terrys', they did
1076not have a bankruptcy in their history. In addition, the
1086Eggers' combined monthly income was higher than the Terrys' 2 / and
1098the younger of their two children was nine years old. The
1109credit report obtained for the Eggers reflected a credit score
1119of 672 for Jessica Egger and 696 for Rick Egger, with an
1131unconditional approval rating.
1134Respondents' Tenant Selection Process
113810. McMenamy testified that in evaluating applications,
1145potential tenants must meet certain minimum criteria. Factors
1153he considers in assessing applicants include credit checks,
1161criminal background checks, employment status, and rental
1168history. However, he agreed that the evaluation process he uses
1178is subjective.
118011. McMenamy acknowledged that bankruptcy would not
1187automatically disqualify a potential tenant, and in fact,
1195confirmed that he has rented to tenants who have a bankruptcy in
1207their history. With regard to credit scores, McMenamy testified
1216that he considered a score below 500 to be unacceptable.
122612. Mrs. Davis testified that McMenamy manages the entire
1235process of renting the Property on behalf of herself and her
1246husband. Once McMenamy determines the suitability of a
1254prospective tenant, he discusses that tenant with the Davises.
1263McMenamy does not discuss applicants with the Davises that he
1273does not consider eligible. The Davises do not participate in
1283the background screening process and they do not review
1292applicants' credit ratings. However, Mrs. Davis was aware of
1301McMenamy's process for selecting tenants, and she confirmed her
1310understanding that applicants must meet certain minimum
1317requirements. In selecting a tenant, McMenamy looks not only
1326for a candidate that is financially qualified, but also one who
1337will rent the property for a significant period of time, will
1348take good care of the property, and will make monthly rent
1359payments in a timely manner, according to Mrs. Davis.
1368Denial of Petitioners' Lease Application
137313. Mr. Davis testified that he and Mrs. Davis discussed
1383the Petitioners' application with McMenamy. At hearing,
1390Mr. Davis recounted that conversation as follows:
1397Cross-examination by Mr. Organes:
1401Q. Mr. Davis, you stated that you had
1409discussed with Mr. McMenamy the application
1415of Steven and Jaime Terry?
1420A. Yes.
1422Q. And thats a common practice with Mr.
1430McMenamy as when he receives reasonably
1436qualified applicants, he discusses them with
1442you?
1443A. Yes.
1445Q. And thats what he did with the Terrys?
1454A. Yes.
1456Q. And you said you did not tell him not to
1467rent to them because of their children?
1474A. That is true, we did not tell him.
1483Q. The issue of children wasnt discussed
1490at all?
1492A. No.
1494Q. What reason did you give him to tell
1503them why their application was being denied?
1510A. Because of their past rental history and
1518their bankruptcy foreclosure.
1521Q. In general if you dont approve of an
1530applicant, what reason would you give for
1537denying that applicant?
1540A. I would give that reason, that we didnt
1549feel that, you know, we probably would get a
1558better applicant and the reason we turned
1565them down is because we didnt feel that
1573they were suitable for our rental.
157914. There is no evidence in this record as to precisely
1590when the above conversation between the Respondents took place,
1599although based upon Mr. Davis's statement that "we probably
1608would get a better applicant" it is reasonable to infer that it
1620was prior to the Eggers submitting their application on the
1630evening of Thursday, May 20, 2010. 3 /
163815. Early on the morning of Friday, May 21, 2010, McMenamy
1649sent an e-mail to Ms. Terry, which read:
1657Jaime
1658I left a message yesterday but did not
1666hear from you. I spoke to the owner about
1675the application and she was concerned about
1682not really having any rental history and the
1690number of small children. She is a
1697perfectionist and just had the home
1703professionally painted. The one family who
1709lived there had small children and there
1716were handprints all over the walls so that
1724it needed to be repainted. So this was her
1733main concern and therefore does not want to
1741rent to you and the family.
1747If you have any questions please call.
1754Sincerely,
1755John
175616. At hearing, Mrs. Davis maintained that the
1764Petitioners' children were not the determining factor in the
1773decision to deny their application. Rather, it was based on
1783their finances and lack of rental history. Consistent with Mr.
1793Davis's testimony, Mrs. Davis also testified that she and her
1803husband did not instruct McMenamy to reject the Petitioners'
1812application because of their children.
181717. After being informed that their application was
1825denied, Petitioners immediately began searching for alternate
1832housing. Mrs. Terry testified that their primary concern was to
1842locate a rental in a high quality school district. Within a
1853couple of weeks of receiving the denial e-mail from McMenamy,
1863the Terrys located a home at 983 Lilac Loop, St. Johns, Florida.
1875Petitioners entered into a lease for this property on June 6,
18862010; the rent was $ 1,200 per month. Although the Lilac Loop
1899home was acceptable, the Terrys considered it to be inferior to
1910the Property, and Petitioners paid to have the home repainted
1920and wired for cable access. The cable installation fee was
1930$150.00.
193118. On September 22, 2010, Petitioners were notified that
1940the Lilac Loop house was in foreclosure. Petitioners appealed
1949to a default-law organization in an attempt to enforce their
1959one-year lease, but were ultimately unsuccessful. As a result
1968of the foreclosure, Petitioners were forced to seek alternative
1977housing within the same school district, and in November 2010,
1987leased a property at 1528 Summerdown Way, Fruit Cove, Florida,
199732259. The monthly rent at 1528 Summerdown Way was $1,600
2008monthly. Petitioners also incurred additional expenses
2014necessitated by hiring a moving service, in the amount of
2024$773.50. At of the hearing, Petitioners continued to reside in
2034the Summerdown Way rental.
2038The Commission Investigation
204119. On August 16, 2010, the Terrys filed a Housing
2051Discrimination Complaint with HUD alleging they had been
2059unlawfully discriminated against by Respondents based upon their
2067familial status. Thereafter, the Commission opened an
2074investigation of the allegation. As part of that investigation,
2083Respondents were invited to submit written statements setting
2091forth their version of the events at issue, and any defenses to
2103the allegation they wished to raise.
210920. On August 19, 2010, the Davises submitted a written
2119statement to the FCHR. In the first paragraph of that submittal
2130the Davises stated:
2133To Whom it May Concern:
2138We enlisted realtor John MaMenamy to find a
2146new tenant for our rental house at 1856
2154Cross Pointe Way, St. Augustine, FL 32092.
2161Mr. McMenamy was told that we preferred not
2169to rent to someone with more than one, if
2178any, very small children at this particular
2185time. The reason being we just had to have
2194the interior of the house professionally
2200repainted and repairs made to several areas,
2207the walls in particular. Additionally, in
2213light of the fact there were several highly
2221qualified persons interested in and looking
2227at the house concurrently.
223121. The submittal continued by identifying four former
2239tenants of the Property, as well as the current tenants (the
2250Eggers), all of whom had children living with them.
225922. It is found that McMenamy's e-mail of May 21, 2010,
2270and the Davises' letter of August 19, 2010, constitute direct
2280evidence that Respondents' decision not to rent to Petitioners
2289was based upon their familial status. The testimony of McMenamy
2299and the Davises that familial status was not the reason for
2310refusing to rent to Petitioners is rejected as not credible.
2320CONCLUSIONS OF LAW
232323. The Division of Administrative Hearings has
2330jurisdiction over the parties and subject matter pursuant to
2339sections 120.569 and 120.57, Florida Statutes (2011).
234624. The Florida Fair Housing Act, codified in sections
2355760.20 through 760.37 provides, in pertinent part, that:
2363(1) It is unlawful to refuse to sell or
2372rent after the making of a bona fide offer,
2381to refuse to negotiate for the sale or
2389rental of, or otherwise to make unavailable
2396or deny a dwelling to any person because of
2405race, color, national origin, sex, handicap,
2411familial status , or religion.
2415(2) It is unlawful to discriminate against
2422any person in the terms, conditions, or
2429privileges of sale or rental of a dwelling,
2437or in the provision of services or
2444facilities in connection therewith, because
2449of race, color, national origin, sex,
2455handicap, familial status , or religion.
2460§ 760.23, Fla. Stat. (emphasis added)
246625. Familial status is "established when an individual who
2475has not attained the age of 18 years is domiciled with . . . a
2490parent. . . " § 760.22(5), Fla. Stat.
249726. The federal Fair Housing Act is "a broad remedial
2507statute," therefore, its provisions are to be generously
2515construed and "its exemptions must be read narrowly." City of
2525Edmonds v. Washington State Bldg. Code Council , 18 F.3d 802, 804
2536(9th Cir.1994), aff'd , 514 U.S. 725, 115 S. Ct. 1776, 131 L. Ed.
25492d 801 (1995). See Massaro v. Mainlands Section 1 & 2 Civic
2561Ass'n, Inc. , 3 F.3d 1472, 1475 (1lth Cir. 1993) ("Exemptions
2572from the Fair Housing Act are to be construed narrowly, in
2583recognition of the important goal of preventing housing
2591discrimination."). In enacting the Florida Fair Housing Act,
2600the legislature "essentially codified" the U.S. Fair Housing
2608Amendments Act of 1988, 42 U.S.C. et seq. Dornbach v. Holley ,
2619854 So. 2d 211, 213 (Fla. 2d DCA 2002). Because the provisions
2631of the Florida Act are virtually identical to those provisions
2641of the federal Act, federal case authority is persuasive in
2651interpreting Florida's statute.
265427. Petitioners bear the initial burden of proof to
2663establish a prima facie case of discrimination by a
2672preponderance of the evidence. In evaluating housing
2679discrimination claims, courts have applied the burden-shifting
2686analysis developed in McDonnell Douglas Corp. v Green , 411 U.S.
2696792, 802-804 (1973), and later refined in Texas Department of
2706Community Affairs v. Burdine , 450 U.S. 248, 252-253 (1981).
2715Following this approach, Petitioners must make a prima facie
2724case for discrimination.
272728. Petitioners may prove discrimination through any
2734combination of direct and indirect evidence, including
2741statistical evidence. However, if they establish a prima facie
2750case of discrimination and Respondents produce any evidence of a
2760legitimate business purpose, Petitioners must prove that the
2768real reason for the complained-of action is discrimination. It
2777is not enough to show that the legitimate business purpose is a
2789pretext. St. Mary's Honor Center v. Hicks , 509 U.S. 502, 113 S.
2801Ct. 2742 (1993). In other words, Petitioners at all times
2811retain the burden of proving that either or both Respondents
2821discriminated against Petitioners.
282429. To state a claim of discrimination in the leasing of
2835property pursuant to the FFHA, a petitioner must prove the
2845following: a) The petitioners were members of a protected
2854class; b) The respondents were aware of the petitioner's
2863protected class; c) The petitioners were ready, willing and able
2873to rent the property at issue; and d) The respondents refused to
2885allow the petitioners to rent the property. Woolington v. 1st
2895Orlando Real Estate Servs. , 2011 U. S. Dist. LEXIS 100426; Dkt.
2906# 6:ll-cv-l107 (M.D. Fla. 2011).
291130. Petitioners have proven by direct evidence housing
2919discrimination by both Respondents based on familial status in
2928this case. 4 /
293231. Section 760.35(3)(b) authorizes section 120.569 and
2939120.57(1) hearings on allegations of discriminatory housing
2946practices. Section 760.35(3)(b) provides that, if the
2953administrative law judge finds a discriminatory housing
2960practice, he or she shall issue a recommended order "prohibiting
2970the practice and recommending affirmative relief from the
2978effects of the practice, including quantifiable damages and
2986reasonable attorney's fees and costs." Section 760.35(3)(b)
2993further provides that any circuit court with jurisdiction may
3002enter judgment on the final order of the Florida Commission on
3013Human Relations.
301532. Section 760.35(3)(b), Florida Statutes, authorizes the
3022Commission to award compensatory damages to the victim of a
"3032discriminatory housing practice," but only if the damages are
3041quantifiable and their amount has been established by competent
3050substantial evidence. In this instance, the undersigned
3057concludes that based upon this record there is no basis to award
3069monetary damages to Petitioners. Rent paid by Petitioners for
3078the Lilac Loop home was $250.00 per month less than rent for the
3091Property, and in one month alone this differential more than
3101offset the $150.00 cost of cable installation at the Lilac Loop
3112home. Likewise, it would be inappropriate to assess as damages
3122the moving costs and higher rent payments associated with
3131Petitioners' relocation from the Lilac Loop home to the
3140Summerdown property. That relocation was the result of the
3149foreclosure on the Lilac Loop home, an intervening event that
3159was remote in time from, and not proximately caused by, the
3170wrongful act at issue. Moreover, the costs associated with that
3180move were not "natural, direct, and necessary consequences" of
3189Respondents' discriminatory housing practice. Rost v. Bowling ,
3196861 So. 2d 1246 (Fla. 2d DCA 2003).
320433. Petitioners did not present any evidence upon which an
3214award of attorney's fees and costs may be based.
3223RECOMMENDATION
3224Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of
3234Law, it is
3237RECOMMENDED that the Florida Commission on Human Relations
3245enter a final order finding Respondents guilty of a
3254discriminatory housing practice against the Terrys in violation
3262of section 760.23(1) and (2), and prohibiting further unlawful
3271housing practices by Respondents.
3275DONE AND ENTERED this 30th day of May, 2012, in
3285Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.
3289S
3290W. DAVID WATKINS
3293Administrative Law Judge
3296Division of Administrative Hearings
3300The DeSoto Building
33031230 Apalachee Parkway
3306Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060
3309(850) 488-9675
3311Fax Filing (850) 921-6847
3315www.doah.state.fl.us
3316Filed with the Clerk of the
3322Division of Administrative Hearings
3326this 30th day of May, 2012.
3332ENDNOTES
33331/ Unless otherwise indicated, all references to the Florida
3342Statutes are to the 2011 version.
33482/ This finding is based upon Mr. McMenamy's testimony at
3358hearing. The Eggers' Rental Application (McMenamy Ex. 1) does
3367not reflect a monthly income for Rick Egger, but does reflect a
3379net monthly income for Jessica Egger of $2,600.00.
33883/ This inference is corroborated by the statement in Mr.
3398McMenamy's e-mail of May 21, 2010, to Mrs. Terry that "I left a
3411message yesterday but did not hear from you" after which he
3422recounts his conversation with Mrs. Davis and informs Mrs. Terry
3432that their application had been denied.
34384/ Should the Commission in its Final Order award damages in
3449favor of Petitioners, all Respondents, including Florida Coastal
3457Jacksonville Realty, Inc. and John McMenamy, would be jointly
3466and severally liable, since were acting as agents for the
3476Davises.
3477COPIES FURNISHED :
3480Geoffrey T. Heekin, Esquire
3484Post Office Box 477
3488Jacksonville, Florida 32201
3491N. Mark New, II, Esquire
3496McGlinchey Stafford, PLLC
3499Suite 200
350110407 Centurion Parkway, North
3505Jacksonville, Florida 32256
3508David A. Organes, Esquire
3512Florida Commission on Human Relations
35172009 Apalachee Parkway, Suite 100
3522Tallahassee, FL 32301
3525Lawrence F. Kranert, Jr., Esquire
3530Florida Commission on Human Relations
3535Suite 100
35372009 Apalachee Parkway
3540Tallahassee, Florida 32301
3543kranerl@fchr.state.fl.us
3544Denise Crawford, Agency Clerk
3548Florida Commission on Human Relations
3553Suite 100
35552009 Apalachee Parkway
3558Tallahassee, Florida 32301
3561violet.crawford@fchr.myflorida.com
3562Steven Terry
3564Jamie Terry
35661528 Summerdown Way
3569St. Johns, Florida 32259
3573NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS
3579All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within
358915 days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions
3600to this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that
3611will issue the Final Order in this case.
- Date
- Proceedings
- PDF:
- Date: 08/15/2012
- Proceedings: Agency Final Order Awarding Affirmative Relief from a Discriminatory Housing Practice filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 05/30/2012
- Proceedings: Recommended Order cover letter identifying the hearing record referred to the Agency.
- PDF:
- Date: 03/05/2012
- Proceedings: Findings of Facts and Conclusions of Law and Memorandum of Law in Support Thereof filed.
- Date: 01/18/2012
- Proceedings: Transcript of Proceedings (not available for viewing) filed.
- Date: 11/29/2011
- Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
- PDF:
- Date: 11/18/2011
- Proceedings: Respondent's Hoyt and Nancy Davis' Addendum to Joint Pre-hearing Stipulation filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 11/15/2011
- Proceedings: Petitioners' and Respondents' Joint Pre-hearing Stipulations filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 09/27/2011
- Proceedings: Agency`s court reporter confirmation letter filed with the Judge.
- PDF:
- Date: 09/19/2011
- Proceedings: Order Granting Continuance and Re-scheduling Hearing (hearing set for November 29 and 30, 2011; 9:00 a.m.; Jacksonville, FL).
- PDF:
- Date: 09/16/2011
- Proceedings: Hoyt and Nancy Davis' Motion for Continuance of Final Hearing filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 09/13/2011
- Proceedings: Agency`s court reporter confirmation letter filed with the Judge.
- PDF:
- Date: 09/01/2011
- Proceedings: Respondents Nancy and Hoyt Davis' Interrogatories to Petitioner Jamie Terry filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 08/02/2011
- Proceedings: Notice of Hearing (hearing set for October 4 and 5, 2011; 9:30 a.m.; Jacksonville, FL).
- PDF:
- Date: 07/29/2011
- Proceedings: Petitioner's Status Report in Response to Order Placing Case in Abeyance filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 07/25/2011
- Proceedings: Order Canceling Hearing and Placing Case in Abeyance (parties to advise status by August 5, 2011).
- PDF:
- Date: 06/29/2011
- Proceedings: Notice of Hearing (hearing set for August 16 and 17, 2011; 9:30 a.m.; Jacksonville, FL).
- PDF:
- Date: 06/14/2011
- Proceedings: Amended Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum (Jaime Terry) filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 06/07/2011
- Proceedings: Order Granting Continuance (parties to advise status by June 17, 2011).
- PDF:
- Date: 05/27/2011
- Proceedings: Motion to Quash Subpoena for Deposition Motion for Protective Order filed.
- PDF:
- Date: 05/25/2011
- Proceedings: Notice of Hearing (hearing set for June 28 and 29, 2011; 9:00 a.m.; Jacksonville, FL).
- PDF:
- Date: 05/16/2011
- Proceedings: Order (granting motion for extension of time to respond to initial order).
Case Information
- Judge:
- W. DAVID WATKINS
- Date Filed:
- 05/05/2011
- Date Assignment:
- 07/12/2011
- Last Docket Entry:
- 08/15/2012
- Location:
- Jacksonville, Florida
- District:
- Northern
- Agency:
- ADOPTED IN TOTO
Counsels
-
Violet Denise Crawford, Agency Clerk
Address of Record -
Geoffrey T. Heekin, Esquire
Address of Record -
Lawrence F. Kranert, Jr., Esquire
Address of Record -
N. Mark New, II, Esquire
Address of Record -
Steven Terry
Address of Record