14-004303TTS Broward County School Board vs. Nicole Pollino
 Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Thursday, April 30, 2015.


View Dockets  
Summary: Just cause exists to suspend the employment of Respondent, a teacher, for five days without pay, for gross insubordination for failure to follow FCAT testing protocols.

1STATE OF FLORIDA

4DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

8BROWARD COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD,

12Petitioner,

13vs. Case No. 14 - 4303TTS

19NICOLE POLLINO,

21Respondent.

22_______________________________/

23RECOMMENDED ORDER

25Pursuant to notice, a formal admi nistrative hearing was

34conducted before Administrative Law Judge Mary Li Creasy by video

44teleconference at sites in Tallahassee and Lauderdale Lakes,

52Florida, on February 19 , 2015.

57APPEARANCES

58For Petitioner: Adrian J. Alvarez, Esq uire

65Ha liczer, Pettis, and Schwamm, P.A.

71One Financial Plaza, Seventh Floor

76100 Southeast Third Avenue

80Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33394

84For Respondent: Melissa C. Mihok, Esquire

90Melissa C. Mihok , P.A.

941718 East Seventh Avenue , Suite 301

100Tampa, Florida 33605

103STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

107Whether Petitioner has just cause to suspend Respondent, a

116classroom teacher, for five days without pay based upon her

126failure to fol low the officially assigned Florida Comprehensive

135Assessment Test ( FCAT ) testing schedule, as alleged in the

146Administrative Complaint.

148PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

150At its regularly scheduled meeting on June 24 , 2014, Broward

160C ounty School Board (Petitioner or Sch ool Board ) voted to suspend

173the employment of Nicole Pollino (Respondent) for five days

182without pay . On August 20 , 2014, Respondent requested a formal

193administrative hearing to contest Petitioner ' s action. On

202September 15 , 2014, Petitioner forwarded the request to the

211Division of Administrative Hearings, which scheduled and

218conducted the hearing.

221The matter was originally set for hearing for December 2,

2312014. The matter was rescheduled twice based upon the parties '

242j oint motions for continuance. On Febr uary 10 , 201 5 , the parties

255filed a Pre - hearing Stipulation, including a statement of agreed

266facts that have been adopted and incorporated herein as

275necessary.

276At the final hearing, which took place on February 19,

2862015, Petitioner called the following witn esses: Cheryl Cendon,

295Principal of Millennium Middle School (MMS); Berta Hernandez -

304Berkowitz, Guidance employee at MMS; Sandy Leung, teacher at

313MMS; and Sophia Shaw, teacher at MMS. Petitioner ' s Exhibits 1

325through 3, 5 through 8, 10, 12 and 13 were admit ted in evidence.

339Respondent testified on h er own behalf and Kim Baker and Helen

351Vargas, both teachers at MMS, also testified on Respondent ' s

362behalf. Respondent ' s E xhibits 1 and 2 were admitted in evidence .

376The two - volume final hearing T ranscript was fi led on

388March 27 , 2015 . 1/ Both parties timely filed proposed recommended

399orders which were considered in the preparation of this

408Recommended Order.

410Unless otherwise noted, citations to the Florida S tatutes

419and administrative rules refer to the version s i n effect at the

432time of the events giving rise to the charges identified in the

444Administrative Complaint .

447FINDING S OF FACT

4511. Petitioner is a duly - constituted s chool b oard charged

463with the duty of operating, controlling, and supervising all

472free public sc hools within Broward County , Florida, pursuant

481to A rticle IX, section 4(b) , Florida Constitution, and

490section 1001.32, Florida Statutes.

4942. At all times material hereto, Respondent was employed as

504a seventh grade teacher at MMS , a public school in Broward

515County, Florida. Respondent has been employed by the School

524Board for approximately ten years pursuant to a professional

533service contract and subject to Florida Statutes, the regulations

542issued by the Florida State Board of Education , the policies and

553pr ocedures of the School Board , and the collective bargaining

563agreement between the Broward Teacher ' s Union (BTU) and the

574School Board . Prior to teaching at MMS, Respondent taught school

585in Dade County for approximately 15 years.

5923. T he FCAT is a test whic h was given annually since 1998

606through the 2013 - 2014 school year to all Florida public school

618students in grades three through 11. The test measures student

628achievement in reading, writing, mathematics, and science based

636on the state ' s grade - level standa rds. 2 / Respondent proctored FCAT

651exams since the test ' s inception.

6584 . S tate, district , and school level training is provi ded

670annually to teachers, including R espondent, so they may comply

680with FCAT requirements and avoid potential ramifications to the

689sc hool or the students for violation of those requirements.

6995 . Ramifications for failing to comply with FCAT

708requirements include sanctions against the teacher and/or the

716school , and po ssible termination or in validation of a school ' s

729letter grade.

7316. Teach ers are specifically educated on the process of

741obtaining certification numbers and si gn ing a receipt for certain

752materials designated to them for FCAT testing purposes.

760Furthermore, the teachers are provided a three - digit code which

771is provided to the st udents so that the S tate knows which

784teachers proctored which exams. The requirements and safeguards

792relating to properly proctoring and administering the FCAT

800testing are important to the integrity of such tests.

8092013 FCAT

8117 . The FCAT for the 2012 - 2013 school year was administered

824at MMS in April 2013. Respondent was the testing p roctor during

836the mathematics FCAT on April 15, 2013.

8438 . Respondent provided the students a testing reference

852sheet for the End of C ourse exam for an algebra class rather than

866the F CAT r eference sheet. According to Respondent, this was the

878sheet that was distributed to her to provide to the students from

890the Guidance Department. This error was brought to Respondent ' s

901attention by students during the first session of the exam.

911Believing that she was not permitted to discuss the contents of

922the exam with the students, Respondent instructed the students to

932do the best they could with what they had.

9419 . It is alleged that R espondent failed to follow

952appropriate testing procedures by not timely contacting

959administration or a d d ressing the problem when the students

970brought it to her attention during session 1 of the FCAT Math

982test. Respondent ' s failure to address the situation ,

991immediately, or during a scheduled break in the testing , led to

1002the use of the wrong reference sheet for the second session as

1014well as the first . U ltimately , the FCAT was invalidated for

1026Respondent ' s students and the school district had to purchase an

1038alternative exam for the students who were not provided th e

1049proper FCAT reference sheet.

105310 . Respondent received a one - day suspension without pay ,

1064based on her failure to follow proper FCAT testing protocols ,

1074which Respondent did not contest.

10792014 FCAT

108111 . The FCAT testing process has been supervised by

1091Princip al Cheryl Cendon since she opened MMS as its Principal in

11032002. Principal Cendon ' s process regarding the scheduling of

1113FCAT testing , and assignment of teachers to groups of students to

1124proctor , was consistent through the 2013 Î 2014 school year. FCAT

1135admin istration requires a complex schedule because of limited

1144computer a vailability and teachers ' scheduled planning periods

1153and lunchtimes.

115512 . The first step in this process is for Principal Cendon

1167to prepare a draft schedule which she then shares with teach ing

1179teams to solicit their input. After receiving teacher input,

1188P rincipal Cendon ' s second step is to meet with technical

1200personnel to ensure that the appropriate number of computers is

1210available for the testing as scheduled. The third step is for

1221princi pal Cendon to meet with E xceptional S tudent E ducation (ESE)

1234and English for S peakers of O ther L anguages (ESOL) teachers to

1247determine whether special accommodations are required for

1254particular students.

125613 . The fourth and final step for Principal Cendon is to

1268prepare a final schedule on colored paper to be disseminated at

1279the FCAT teacher training session approximately two weeks prior

1288to the beginning of testing.

129314 . During Principal Cendon ' s tenure at MMS, teachers have

1305often been assigned to proctor thei r Monday morning , first block ,

1316students for standardized testing, including for the FCAT.

1324However, there is no requirement that teachers be assigned these

1334groups and Principal Cendon has assigned different groups of

1343students to teachers as needed in the p ast.

135215 . Approximately two weeks prior to FCAT testing, the

1362school transmits to the S tate a list of which students will be

1375tested at what time, in which classroom , and by which teacher.

1386The S tate then generates a ticket for each student which is

1398provided to the students on the day of the test. On test day,

1411t eachers are required to pick up and sign o ut their assigned

1424materials from a secure room monitored by Guidance . No one has

1436the authority to modify the final schedule other than Principal

1446Cendon.

144716 . Respondent was on the " Innovators " teaching team during

1457the 2013 - 2014 school year which included four other teachers.

1468Principal Cendon met with the Innovators team for a " data chat "

1479on February 14, 2014, to review the first draft of her FC A T

1493schedule. A t this meeting there was a discussion regarding

1503changing the time of the testing for one lab but no discussion

1515regarding which students were assigned to which teachers. Some

1524members of the Innovators team, including Respondent , were not

1533assigned their Mon day morning, first block, students.

154117. On April 9 , 2014, MMS teachers, including Respondent,

1550attended FCAT training and received the final FCAT testing

1559schedule and assignment printed on blue paper which had been

1569prepared by Principal Cendon. This train ing included a

1578PowerPoint presentation. On the fourth slide under the heading

" 1587testing reminders, " teachers were instructed:

1592R efer to schedule set up for each grade

1601level. ASK QUESTIONS BEFORE TESTING BEGINS.

1607Follow exact testing time and day for each

1615s ession, NO DEVIATIONS.

1619FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THESE RULES MAY RESULT

1627IN REPRIMAND, C RIMINAL PENALTY OR LOSS OF

1635CERTIFICATION.

163618. Between February 14, 2014 , and the first day of FC A T

1649test ing , April 23, 2014, Respondent did not request a change in

1661the sc hedule from either Guidance or Principal Cendon.

167019. Respondent was concerned that she was not assigned her

1680Monday morning block of students (Innovators E) for the 2014

1690FCAT.

169120. Sometime after receiving the draft schedule in

1699February 2014, R espondent addressed her concerns with I nnovators

1709T eam L eader , Kim Baker. E ither before or after receiving the

1722draft schedule , Ms. Baker briefly spoke separately to Principal

1731Cendon and G uidance employee, Berta Hernandez - Berkowitz , and

1741stated " we ' re testing our regu lar Monday morning groups " t o which

1755Principal Cendon and Ms. Hernandez - Berkowitz purportedly said

" 1764yes. " In fact , Ms. Baker was assigned her Monday morning group

1775of students.

177721. Respondent believes she had a similar conversation

1785with Ms. Hernandez - Berko witz in passing. 3/ Neither Respondent nor

1797Ms. Baker advised P rincipal Cendon or Ms. Hernandez - Berkowitz of

1809their belief that the final schedule was in error because several

1820team members were assigned students other than the ir Monday

1830morning, first block.

18332 2 . Based upon these informal and brief conversations ,

1843Respondent and Ms. Baker decided to create a different schedule

1853for the Innovators team after distribution of the final schedule

1863on April 9, 2014. Respondent prepared the revised schedule for

1873the wee k of the FCAT because she had a teaching schedule template

1886on her computer . Respondent disseminated it to the Innovators

1896teachers by e - mail on or about April 14, 2014 , and also advised

1910several team members verbally prior to the FCAT on April 23 to

1922follow the schedule which she (Respondent) created . Respondent

1931did not send the revised schedule to Guidance or Principal

1941Cendon.

194223. Two members of the team, Sophia Shaw and Sandy Leung,

1953were confused by the e - mail and direction from R espondent and

1966asked the F CAT C oordinator, Janet Jackson, prior to the test,

1978which schedule to follow. They were instructed by Ms. Jackson to

1989follow the blue schedule , which was the final schedule prepared

1999by Principal Cendon.

200224. On the first morning of FCAT testing, April 23, 2 014,

2014Respondent reported to the secure room and signed out the bin of

2026materials for Innovators E, her Monday morning group, rather than

2036her assigned group of Innovators B . Similarly, Ms. Vargas signed

2047out the bin of test materials for her Monday morning g roup,

2059Innovators D , rather than her assigned group for FCAT,

2068Innovators C.

20702 5 . When Ms. Leung arrived to sign out her assigned bin

2083for Innovators D, she initially grabbed the wrong bin for

2093Innovators B because the materials for D h a d already been remov ed

2107from the room by Ms. Vargas. Ms. Leung realized the error

2118because Innovators B was assigned to Respondent. Ms. Leung

2127brought this error to the attention of Ms. Jackson. Respondent

2137and Ms. Vargas were instructed to immediately return to the

2147secure roo m to pick up the correct materials as assigned on the

2160final schedule prepared by Principal Cendon.

21662 6 . When Ms. Shaw arrived to pick up her assigned materials

2179for Group E, she found they had already been checked out by

2191Respondent and only the materials fo r Group C remained. Both

2202Ms. Leung and Ms. Shaw had to wait for their materials to be

2215returned to the test room and be recounted before they could go

2227to their classrooms. This resulted in a delay of the start of

2239the test for Ms. Shaw ' s students.

2247CONCLUSI ONS OF LAW

22512 7 . DOAH has jurisdiction over the parties to and the

2263subject matter of these proceedings pursuant to sections 120.569

2272and 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.

22762 8 . Because Petitioner , acting through the S uperintendent,

2286seeks to suspend Respondent ' s em ployment without pay , which does

2298not involve the loss of a license or certification, Petitioner

2308has the burden of proving the allegations in its Administrative

2318Complaint by a preponderance of the evidence, as opposed to the

2329more stringent standard of clear and convincing evidence. See

2338McNeill v. Pinellas Cnty. Sch. Bd. , 678 So. 2d 476 (Fla. 2d DCA

23511996); Allen v. Sch. Bd. of Dade Cnty. , 571 So. 2d 568, 569 (Fla.

23653d DCA 1990); Dileo v. Sch. Bd. of Dade Cnty. , 569 So. 2d 883

2379(Fla. 3d DCA 1990).

23832 9 . Section 1012.33(1)(a) , Florida Statutes, includes the

2392following definition of just cause to terminate a teacher ' s

2403professional services contract:

2406Just cause includes, but is not limited to,

2414the following instances, as defined by rule

2421of the State Board of Educati on: immorality,

2429misconduct in office or being convicted or

2436found guilty of, or entering a plea of guilty

2445to, regardless of adjudication of guilt, any

2452crime involving moral turpitude.

245630 . The Administrative C omplaint alleges that Respondent ' s

2467failure to follow clear instructions and directives about FCAT

2476testing constitutes misconduct and insubordination in violation

2483of section s 1008.24 and 1022.33 , Florida Statutes , and Florida

2493Administrative Code R ule 6A - 5.056.

250031 . Whether Respondent committed the char ged offenses is a

2511question of ultimate fact to be determined by the trier of fact

2523in the context of each alleged violation. Holmes v. Turlington ,

2533480 So. 2d 150, 153 (Fla. 1985); McKinney v. Castor , 667 So. 2d

2546387, 389 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Langston v. Jam erson , 653 So. 2d

2559489, 491 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).

25653 2 . Section 1001.02(1) grants the State Board of Education

2576authority to adopt rules pursuant to sections 120.536(1) and

2585120.54 to implement provisions of law conferring duties upon it.

2595Misconduct in Office

25983 3 . Consistent with its rulemaking authority, the State

2608Board of Education has defined " misconduct in office " in r ule 6A -

26215.056(2), which reads in pertinent part as follows:

2629(2) " Misconduct in Office " means one or more

2637of the following:

2640(a) A violation of the Code of Ethics of the

2650Education Profession in Florida as adopted in

2657Rule 6B - 1.001, F.A.C.;

2662(b) A violation of the Principles of

2669Professional Conduct for the Education

2674Profession in Florida as adopted in Rule 6B -

26831.006, F.A.C.;

2685(c) A violation of the adopted school board

2693rules;

2694(d) Behavior that disrupts the student ' s

2702learning environment; or

2705(e) Behavior that reduces the teacher ' s

2713ability or his or her colleagues ' ability to

2722effectively perform duties.

27253 4 . No evidence was presented to demon strate that

2736Respond e nt violated the C ode of Ethics, the Principles of

2748Professional Conduct , or any adopted S chool B oard rule. No

2759evidence was presented that demonstrated that the confusion

2767created on the morning of the test by Respondent ' s actions

2779disrupt ed the learning envir o n men t. At most, the students of

2793Ms. Shaw were briefly delayed in the beginning of the test day.

28053 5 . Only due to the common sense used by Respondent ' s

2819colleagues on the morning of the FCAT , in questioning why they

2830should disregard th e final schedule in favor of Respondent ' s

2842schedule, the mix - up of assigned testing materials did not result

2854in a redu ction of either Responde n t ' s or her colleagues ' ability

2870to effectively perform their duties. Accordingly, Petitioner

2877failed to demonstrate by a preponderance of the evidence that

2887Respondent engaged in " misconduct in office. "

2893Insubordination

28943 6 . " Gross Insubordination " is defined as " the intentional

2904refusal to obey a direct order, reasonable in nature, and given

2915by and with proper authority; misfeasance, or malfeasance as to

2925involve failure in the performance of the required duties. " Fla.

2935Admin. Code R . 6A - 5.066(4).

29423 7 . Section 1008.24 governs test administration and

2951security. In relevant part, section 1008.24(1)(f) and (g)

2959provide s a pers on may not knowingly and willfully " fail to follow

2972test administration directions specified in the test

2979administration manuals " or " participate in, direct, aid, counsel,

2987assist in, or encourage any of the acts prohibited in this

2998section. " V iolation of the se provisions constitute s a

3008misdemeanor in the first degree. § 1008.24(2) , Fla. Stat.

30173 8 . As described above, the 2014 FCAT training materials

3028specifically told teachers, including Respondent , to refer to the

3037schedule and there could be absolutely no dev iations from times

3048and dates. In light of the mandates of section 1008.24, this

3059instruction constituted a direct order, reasonable in nature, and

3068given by and with proper authority .

30753 9 . Given Respondent ' s one - day suspension for failure to

3089follow FCAT tes ting protocols in 2013, she clearly was aware of

3101the need for strict conformance to the FCAT schedule as assigned

3112by Principal Cendon. It is clear that for whatever reason,

3122Respondent intended that she and her fellow team members would

3132only test their Mon day morning, first block, students. Rather

3142than address this concern directly with Princi p a l Cendon or

3154Guidance , either at the February 14 meeting or thereafter,

3163Respondent chose to disseminate her own schedule to only her team

3174members and insist they ign ore the blue final schedule.

3184Respondent ' s assertion , that she believed she somehow had tacit

3195approval of an alternative schedule which she failed to share

3205with administration, simply is not credible.

321140 . Petitioner demonstrated by a preponderance of the

3220evidence that Respondent committed " gross insubordination. "

322641 . Under these circumstances, the undersigned recommends

3234that Respondent be suspended without pay for a period of five

3245days which is consistent with the progressive disciplinary

3253guidelines of Pe titioner.

3257RECOMMENDATION

3258Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

3268Law, it is RECOMMENDED that Petitioner, Broward County School

3277Board, enter a final order finding that just cause exists to

3288suspend the employment of Respondent, Nicole Poll ino, without pay

3298for a period of five days for gross insubordination.

3307DONE AND ENTERED this 30th day of April , 2015 , in

3317Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

3321S

3322MARY LI CREASY

3325Administrative Law Judge

3328Division of Administrat ive Hearings

3333The DeSoto Building

33361230 Apalachee Parkway

3339Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3060

3344(850) 488 - 9675

3348Fax Filing (850) 921 - 6847

3354www.doah.state.fl.us

3355Filed with the Clerk of the

3361Division of Administrative Hearings

3365this 30th day of April , 2015 .

3372ENDNOTE S

33741/ The first volume of the T ranscript was inadvertently not filed

3386until April 15, 2015. Respondent was provided additional time to

3396file a proposed recommended order.

34012 / These facts regarding the FCAT were not provided at the

3413hearing but the undersign ed sua sponte took judicial notice of

3424this general background information regarding the FCAT available

3432on the Florida Department of Education website: www.fldoc.edu .

34413/ Both Principal Cendon and Ms. Hernandez - Berkowitz have no

3452recollection of such a con versation , and Ms. Baker does not

3463recall the details with any specificity . Ms. Baker ' s version is

3476being credited only because it makes no difference in the outcome

3487of this proceeding.

3490COPIES FURNISHED:

3492Tria Lawton - Russell, Esquire

3497The School Board of Broward County

3503Fourteen th Floor

3506600 Southeast Third Avenue

3510Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301

3514(eServed)

3515Melissa C. Mihok, Esquire

3519Melissa C. Mihok, P.A.

35231718 East Seventh Avenue , Suite 301

3529Tampa, Florida 33605

3532(eServed)

3533Adrian J. Alvarez , Esquire

3537Haliczer, Pettis, and Schwamm, P.A.

3542One Financial Plaza, Seventh Floor

3547100 Southeast Third Avenue

3551Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33394

3555Matthew Mears , General Counsel

3559Department of Education

3562Turlington Building, Suite 1244

3566325 West Gaines Street

3570Tallahassee, Florida 3 2399 - 0400

3576(eServed)

3577Robert W. Runcie, Superintendent

3581Broward County School Board

3585Tenth Floor

3587600 Southeast Third Avenue

3591Fort Lauderdale, Florida 33301

3595(eServed)

3596Pam Stewart

3598Commissioner of Education

3601Department of Education

3604Turlington Building, Suite 151 4

3609325 West Gaines Street

3613Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 0400

3618(eServed)

3619NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

3625All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within

363515 days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions

3646to this Recommended Or der should be filed with the agency that

3658will issue the Final Order in this case.

Select the PDF icon to view the document.
PDF
Date
Proceedings
PDF:
Date: 07/08/2015
Proceedings: Agency Final Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/23/2015
Proceedings: Agency Final Order
PDF:
Date: 04/30/2015
Proceedings: Recommended Order
PDF:
Date: 04/30/2015
Proceedings: Recommended Order cover letter identifying the hearing record referred to the Agency.
PDF:
Date: 04/30/2015
Proceedings: Recommended Order (hearing held February 19, 2015). CASE CLOSED.
PDF:
Date: 04/20/2015
Proceedings: Respondent's Proposed Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/14/2015
Proceedings: Order Granting Extension of Time.
PDF:
Date: 04/14/2015
Proceedings: Respondent's Unopposed Motion to File Proposed Recommended Order Out of Time filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/13/2015
Proceedings: Petitioner's Proposed Recommended Order filed.
Date: 03/27/2015
Proceedings: Transcript (not available for viewing) filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/24/2015
Proceedings: (Petitioner's) Notice of Filing filed.
Date: 02/19/2015
Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
PDF:
Date: 02/13/2015
Proceedings: Petitioner's Notice of Filing Proposed Exhibits filed.
Date: 02/13/2015
Proceedings: Respondent's Proposed Exhibits filed (exhibits not available for viewing).
PDF:
Date: 02/11/2015
Proceedings: Respondent's Notice of Filing Proposed Exhibits filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/10/2015
Proceedings: Pre-hearing Stipulation of the Parties filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/05/2015
Proceedings: Amended Notice of Hearing by Video Teleconference (hearing set for February 19 and 20, 2015; 9:00 a.m.; Lauderdale Lakes and Tallahassee, FL; amended as to video teleconference and hearing locations).
PDF:
Date: 12/30/2014
Proceedings: Order Granting Continuance and Re-scheduling Hearing by Webcast (hearing set for February 19 and 20, 2015; 9:00 a.m.; Fort Lauderdale, FL).
PDF:
Date: 12/23/2014
Proceedings: Joint Motion for Continuance of Hearing filed.
PDF:
Date: 11/18/2014
Proceedings: Order Granting Continuance and Re-scheduling Hearing by Webcast (hearing set for January 6 and 7, 2015; 9:00 a.m.; Fort Lauderdale, FL).
PDF:
Date: 11/13/2014
Proceedings: Joint Motion for Continuance filed.
PDF:
Date: 11/12/2014
Proceedings: Order on Motion for Extension of Time.
PDF:
Date: 11/07/2014
Proceedings: (Petitioner's) Motion to Extend Time to Answer Interrogatories & Respond to Request to Produce filed.
PDF:
Date: 10/31/2014
Proceedings: Respondent's Amended Notice of Email Designation filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/24/2014
Proceedings: Order of Pre-hearing Instructions.
PDF:
Date: 09/24/2014
Proceedings: Notice of Hearing by Webcast (hearing set for December 2 and 3, 2014; 9:00 a.m.; Fort Lauderdale and Tallahassee, FL).
PDF:
Date: 09/19/2014
Proceedings: (Petitioner's) Response to Initial Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/17/2014
Proceedings: Respondent's Notice of Email Designation filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/17/2014
Proceedings: Notice of Appearance (Eugene Pettis) filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/16/2014
Proceedings: Initial Order.
PDF:
Date: 09/15/2014
Proceedings: Request for Administrative Hearing filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/15/2014
Proceedings: Administrative Complaint filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/15/2014
Proceedings: Petition for Formal Proceedings filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/15/2014
Proceedings: Agency referral filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/15/2014
Proceedings: Request for Administrative Hearing filed.

Case Information

Judge:
MARY LI CREASY
Date Filed:
09/15/2014
Date Assignment:
09/16/2014
Last Docket Entry:
07/08/2015
Location:
Lauderdale Lakes, Florida
District:
Southern
Agency:
ADOPTED IN TOTO
Suffix:
TTS
 

Counsels

Related DOAH Cases(s) (1):

Related Florida Statute(s) (9):