15-007350 Department Of Business And Professional Regulation, Division Of Hotels And Restaurants vs. Latchman's Seafood Market And Grill, Inc., D/B/A Latchman's Seafood Market And Grill, Inc.
 Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Thursday, May 5, 2016.


View Dockets  
Summary: Petitioner proved by clear and convincing evidence that an administrative penalty of $2,150.00 and recoupment of investigative costs were warranted for health and safety violations found at the Respondent's restaurant.

1STATE OF FLORIDA

4DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

8DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND

12PROFESSIONAL REGULATION,

14DIVISION OF HOTELS AND

18RESTAURANTS,

19Petitioner,

20vs. Case Nos. 15 - 7347

2615 - 7350

29LATCHMAN'S SEAFOOD MARKET AND

33GRILL, INC., d/b/a LATCHMAN'S

37SEAFOOD MARKET AND GRILL, IN C.,

43Respondent.

44_______________________________/

45RECOMMENDED ORDER

47Pursuant to notice, a final hearing was conducted on

56March 10, 2016, before Administrative Law Judge ("ALJ") Robert L.

68Kilbride , Divisi on of Administrative Hearings ("DOAH") , via video

79teleconference, at locations in Lauderdale Lakes and Tallahassee,

87Florida.

88APPEARANCES

89For Petitioner: Charles F. Tunnicliff, Esquire

95Charles LaRay Dewrell, Esquire

99Depart ment of Business and

104Professional Regulation

1061940 North Monroe Street, Suite 42

112Tallahassee, Florida 32399

115For Respondent: No appearance

119STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE S

124Whether Respondent committed the viol ations alleged in the

133administrative complaints dated July 8, 2015, and September 30,

1422015 ; and, if so, what disciplinary action should be taken

152against Respondent.

154PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

156On July 8, 2015, Petitioner, Department of Business and

165Professional Regulation, Division of Hotels and Restaurants

172( " Division " or "Petitioner" ), filed an Administrative Complaint,

181DBPR Case No. 2015 - 029646, against Respondent , Latchman's Seafood

191Market and Grill, Inc., d/b/a Latchman's Seafood Market and

200Grill, Inc . The A dministrative Complaint alleged the following

210violation:

211(1) Respondent failed to take effective measures to protect

220the establishment against the entrance and the breeding on the

230premises of all vermin, in violation of s ection 509.221(7),

240Florida Statut es (2015). 1/

245Subsequently, on September 30, 2015, Petitioner filed a

253separate Administrative Complaint, DBPR Case No. 2015 - 042510,

262against Respondent. The Administrative Complaint alleged the

269following violations:

271(1) Respondent ' s employee was engaging in food preparation

281while not wearing a hair restraint, in violation of Food Code

292Rule 2 - 402.11 (2009). 2/

298(2) Respondent ' s freezer chest door was in disrepair, in

309violation of Food Code Rule 4 - 501.11.

317(3) Respondent failed to take effective measures to protect

326the establishment against the entrance and the breeding on the

336premises of all vermin, in violation of s ection 509.221(7).

346(4) T he outer openings on Respondent ' s establishment were

357not protected with self - closing doors, in violation of Food Code

369R ule 6 - 202.15(A) , (C) , and (D) .

378(5) Respondent failed to provide proof of valid food

387manager certification for its food manager upon the inspector' s

397request, in violation of s ection 509.039.

404(6) Respondent failed to provide proof of valid employee

413food ha ndler training certifications for its employees upon

422request, in violation of se ction 509.045(5).

429On December 7, 2015 , and on December 10, 2015, Respondent

439executed an Election of Rights form for DBPR Case No. 2015 - 042510

452and DBPR Case No. 2015 - 029646, res pectively , and requested formal

464administrative hearings involving disputed issues of material

471fact.

472O n December 29, 2015, Petitioner referred both of the above

483cases to DOAH to conduct a formal hearing.

491On January 6, 2016, an Order of Consolidation was iss ued,

502consolidating the above cases for all purposes, including final

511hearing, pursuant to Florida Administrative Code Rule 28 - 106.108

521(April 1, 1997) . 3/

526At the final hearing, Petitioner presented the testimony of

535two witnesses, Deborah Audain, s anitation a nd s afety s pecialist

547( " Inspector Audain " or "Audain" ) , and Rebecca Howard, s anitation

558and s afety s pecialist ( " Inspector Howard " or "Howard" ).

569Petitioner offered seven exhibits , which were accepted into

577evidence. Despite proper and timely notification, Re spondent

585failed to appear or attend the hearing, present any testimony, or

596offer any exhibits.

599The T ranscript of the hearing was filed with the Clerk of

611DOAH on April 8, 2016. Petitioner timely filed a Proposed

621Recommended Order. Respondent did not file a post - hearing

631document.

632FINDING S OF FACT

636Based on the evidence presented at the final hearing, the

646undersigned makes the following findings of relevant and material

655facts:

6561. The Division is the state agency charged with regulating

666public lodging and pub lic food service establishments pursuant to

676chapter 509.

6782. At all times material hereto, Respondent was licensed as

688a public food service establishment in the s tate of Florida by

700the Division. P et . Ex. 1.

7073. The Division's first witness, Inspector Auda in, is

716employed by the Division as a s anitation and s afety s pecialist at

7305080 Coconut Creek Parkway, Suite A, Margate, Florida 33063.

739Audain has worked for the Division for approximately ten years as

750an inspector. Prior to working for the Division, Audai n worked

761in the food industry as a managing partner at a restaurant in New

774York.

7754. Upon gaining employment in the Division, Audain was

784trained on the Food Code and the laws and rules pertaining to

796public food service establishments and public lodging

803est ablishments. Audain is also a c ertified f ood m anager. Audain

816receives continuing education and training on a monthly basis.

825Audain performs more than 700 inspections each year.

8335 . The Division' s second witness, Inspector Howard, is

843employed by the Divi sion as a s anitation and s afety s pecialist at

8585080 Coconut Creek Parkway, Suite A, Margate, Florida 33063.

867Howard has worked for the Division for approximately one and one -

879half years.

8816. Prior to working for the Division, Howard worked in the

892food indust ry as an executive chef at a Hilton Hotel in Tampa, a

906chef at a W Hotel in South Beach, and a chef at Los Hotel in

921South Beach.

9237. Upon gaining employment in the Division, Howard was

932trained on the Food Code and on the laws and rules pertaining to

945public food service establishments and public lodging

952establishments. Howard is also a c ertified f ood m anager. Howard

964receives continuing education and training on a monthly basis.

973Howard performs approximately 800 inspections each year.

9808. " Basic Item " means an item defined in the Food Code as a

993C ore I tem. Fla. Admin. Code R . 61C - 1.001(5) ( January 1, 2013).

10099 . " Basic violation " means a violation of a basic item, as

1021defined in Florida Administrative Code Rule 61C - 1.001 or a

1032violation of c hapter 509 or c hapte r 61C, which relates to general

1046sanitation and does not meet the definition of high priority

1056violation or intermediate violation and is not otherwise

1064identified in subsection (6) of rule 61C - 1.005 .

107410. " Intermediate violation " means a violation of an

1082inte rmediate item, as defined in r ule 61C - 1.001 or a violation of

1097c hapter 509 or c hapter 61C, which relates to specific actions,

1109equipment , or procedures that contribute to the occurrence of a

1119high priority violation, but does not meet the definition of high

1130p riority violation or basic violation and is not otherwise

1140identified in subsection (6) of rule 61C - 1.005 .

115011. " High priority violation " means a violation of a high

1160priority item, as defined in r ule 61C - 1.001 or a violation of

1174c hapter 509 or c hapter 61C, d etermined by the D ivision to pose a

1190direct or significant threat to the public health, safety, or

1200welfare and is not otherwise identified in subsection (6) of

1210rule 61C - 1.005 .

1215DBPR C ase N o . 2015 - 029646

12241 2 . On July 1, 2015, Audain performed an inspection of

1236Latchman ' s Seafood Market and Grill, Inc. During the inspection,

1247Audain prepared and signed an inspection report setting forth the

1257violation she encountered during the inspection. P et . Ex. 2 .

126913 . On July 1, 2015, Audain notified Respondent of the

1280cited violation. Ricardo Latchman signed the inspection report

1288on behalf of R espondent. P et . Ex. 2.

12981 4 . During the inspection on July 1, 2015, Audain observed

1310roach activity present as evidenced by eight live roaches found

1320crawling on the floor in the food s ervice area, three live

1332roaches crawling on the fryer in the kitchen, three live roaches

1343found by the water heater in the kitchen, two live roaches found

1355between the hose from the water heater and the wall, two live

1367roaches found underneath the kitchen pre p table, at least six

1378live roaches found in the air conditioner closet, one live roach

1389crawling on the wall next to the refrigerator, five live roaches

1400crawling on the reach - in cooler by the door to the front service

1414area, and one live roach crawling on th e wall in the front

1427service area of the establishment. This is a violation because

1437roaches can place the health of consumers at risk by transferring

1448and transmitting bacteria and disease to food, food contact

1457surfaces, and food storage areas. P et . Ex. 2.

14671 5 . As a result of these observations, the Division entered

1479an Order of Emergency Suspension of License and Closure against

1489Respondent. The emergency order was issued on the same date as

1500the inspection, July 1, 2015. P et . Ex. 7.

1510DBPR C ase N o . 2015 - 042 510

15201 6 . O n July 16, 2015, Audain performed an inspection of

1533Latchman ' s Seafood Market and Grill, Inc. During this

1543inspection, Audain prepared and signed an inspection report

1551setting forth the violations she encountered during the

1559inspection. P et . Ex. 3.

15651 7 . On July 16, 2015, Audain notified Respondent about the

1577violations and informed Respondent that the violations needed to

1586be corrected by July 17, 2015. Mr. Latchman signed the

1596inspection report on behalf of Respondent. P et . Ex. 3.

16071 8 . On July 17, 2 015, Howard performed a callback

1619inspection of Latchman ' s Seafood Market and Grill, Inc. During

1630the inspection, Howard prepared and signed an inspection report

1639indicating that some of the violations noted on the July 16,

16502015 , inspection report had not be en corrected. P et . Ex. 4.

166319 . O n July 17, 2015, Howard notified Respondent about the

1675violations and informed Respondent that the violations needed to

1684be corrected by September 1, 2015. Mr. Latchman signed the

1694inspection report on behalf of Respondent. P et . Ex. 4.

170520 . O n September 2, 2015, Audain performed a callback

1716inspection of Latchman ' s Seafood Market and Grill, Inc. During

1727the inspection, Audain prepared and signed an inspection report

1736indicating that some of the violations noted on the July 16,

17472015 , and July 17, 2015 , inspection reports had not been

1757corrected. P et . Ex. 5.

176321 . O n September 2, 2015, Audain notified Respondent about

1774the violations and informed Respondent that the violations needed

1783to be corrected by September 3, 2015. Mr. Latchm an signed the

1795inspection report on behalf of Respondent. P et . Ex. 5.

18062 2 . On September 3, 2015, Audain performed a callback

1817inspection of Latchman ' s Seafood Market and Grill, Inc. During

1828the inspection, Audain prepared and signed an inspection report

1837ind icating that some of the violations noted on the July 16,

18492015 ; July 17, 2015 ; and September 2, 2015 , inspection reports

1859had not been corrected. P et . Ex. 6.

18682 3 . The first violation was observed during the July 16,

18802015 ; September 2, 2015 ; and September 3 , 2015 , inspections.

1889Audain observed employees engaging in food preparation without

1897proper hair restraints. This is a violation because hair can be

1908both a direct and indirect vehicle for contamination. Food

1917employees may contaminate their hands when the y touch their hair.

1928Proper use of a hair restraint keeps dislodged hair from ending

1939up in the food and may also deter employees from touching their

1951hair.

19522 4 . The Food Code defines the governing requirement for the

1964first violation as a Core I tem. The D iv ision has designated

1977violations of C ore I tems as basic violations. P et . Ex. 3, 5 - 6 ;

1994Fo od Code 2009 - Annex 3 Public Health Reasons/Administrative

2004Guidelines , p . 367; Fla. Admin. Code R . 61C - 1.005(5)(c).

20162 5 . The second violation was observed during the Ju ly 16,

20292015 ; July 17, 2015 ; September 2, 2015 ; and September 3, 2015 ,

2040inspections. The inspectors observed equipment in poor repair as

2049evidenced by a freezer chest door having filament (insulation)

2058exposed. This is a violation because failure to properly

2067maintain equipment could lead to violations of the associated

2076requirements of the Food Code that place the health of the public

2088at risk. Refrigeration units in disrepair may no longer be

2098capable of properly cooling or holding potentially hazardous

2106(time/ temperature control for safety) foods at safe temperatures.

2115The Food Code defines the governing requirement for the second

2125violation as a Core I tem.

21312 6 . The D ivision has designated Co re I tems as basic

2145violations. P et . Ex. 3 - 6; Food Code 2009 - Annex 3 P ublic Health

2162Reasons/Administrative Guidelines , p . 460; Fla. Admin. Code

2170R . 61C - 1.005(5)(c).

21752 7 . The third violation was observed during the July 16,

21872015 ; September 2, 2015 ; and September 3, 2015 , inspections.

2196During the July 16, 2015 , inspection, Audai n observed roach

2206activity present as evidenced by four live roaches found nestled

2216in crevices by the air conditioner in the kitchen and one live

2228roach crawling on the floor in front of the reach - in cooler

2241between the kitchen and front service area.

22482 8 . Du ring the September 2, 2015 , inspection, Audain

2259observed one live roach crawling on the kitchen floor. Audain

2269also observed one dead roach in the dining room freezer and one

2281dead roach near the kitchen door during her inspection on

2291September 3, 2015. This is a violation because roaches can place

2302the health of consumers at risk by transferring and transmitting

2312bacteria and disease to food, food contact surfaces, and food

2322storage areas.

232429 . T he Division properly designated this violation as a

2335high priority violation. P et . Ex. 3, 5 - 6; Fla. Admin. Code

2349R . 61C - 1.005(5)(a).

23543 0 . The fourth violation was observed during the July 16,

23662015 ; July 17, 2015 ; September 2, 2015 ; and September 3, 2015 ,

2377inspections. The inspectors observed outer openings to the

2385establis hment not protected as evidenced by a rear door which was

2397not self - closing. This is a violation because the presence of

2409insects and rodents (which may transmit bacteria and disease to

2419food) is minimized by protecting and securing outer door openings

2429to th e food establishment.

243431 . T he Food Code defines the governing requirement for the

2446fourth violation as a C ore I tem. The D ivision has designated

2459violations of C ore I tems as basic violations. P et . Ex. 3 - 6; Food

2476Code 2009 - Annex 3 Public Health Reasons/Adm inistrative

2485Guidelines , p p. 485 - 486; Fla. Admin. Code R . 61C - 1.005(5)(c).

24993 2 . T he fifth violation was observed during the July 16,

25122015 ; July 17, 2015 ; September 2, 2015 ; and September 3, 2015 ,

2523inspections. During these inspections, the establishment fai led

2531to provide the inspectors with proof of the manager ' s food

2543manager certification upon request.

25473 3 . This is a violation because managers are required to

2559pass an approved food manager certification course and test which

2569ensures managers have a higher le vel of knowledge regarding

2579sanitation and food handling, preparation, and storage. Lack of

2588the required knowledge can result in breakdowns in these

2597processes. The D ivision has designated this violation as an

2607intermediate violation. P et . Ex. 3 - 6; Fla. Ad min. Code R . 61C -

26241.005(5)(b).

26253 4 . The sixth violation was observed during the July 16,

26372015 ; July 17, 2015 ; September 2, 2015 ; and September 3, 2015 ,

2648inspections. During these inspections, the establishment failed

2655to provide the inspectors with proof of the employeesÓ required

2665state - approved employee training.

26703 5 . This is a violation because employees of restaurants

2681are required to have basic food safety training, which imparts

2691knowledge of basic food handling skills, including proper glove

2700use, procedur es for food temperatures and hot/cold holding,

2709cooking temperature requirements, and basic sanitation measures ,

2716such as personal hygiene and hand - washing. Lack of this

2727knowledge can result in a breakdown in these processes, possibly

2737leading to food - borne illness or unsanitary conditions.

27463 6 . The Division properly designated this violation as an

2757intermediate violation. P et . Ex. 3 - 6; Fla. Admin. Code R. 61C -

27721.005(5)(b).

27733 7 . Respondent had one Emergency Order of Suspension of

2784License and Closure filed with the a gency c lerk by the D ivision

2798within the 12 months preceding the date the current

2807a dministrative c omplaints were issued. The Emergency Order of

2817Suspension of License and Closure was filed on July 7, 2015.

2828P et . Ex. 7 .

2834CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

283738. DOAH has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this

2847proceeding and the parties thereto pursuant to sections 120.569

2856and 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.

286039 . Petitioner has jurisdiction over the operation of

2869public lodging establishments and public food service

2876estab lishments in Florida, pursuant to section 20.165 , Florida

2885Statutes, and chapter 509.

288940 . Petitioner is authorized to take disciplinary action

2898against the holder of such a license for operating in violation

2909of chapter 509, or the rules implementing that ch apter.

291941 . Section 509.261(1) provides that any public lodging

2928establishment or public food service establishment that has

2936operated or is operating in violation of c hapter 509, or the

2948rules promulgated thereunder, is subject to fines not to exceed

2958$1,000. 00 per offense, and the suspension, revocation, or refusal

2969of a license.

297242. In a proceeding such as this one , where Petitioner

2982seeks to discipline Respondent's license and/or to impose an

2991administrative fine, Petitioner has the burden of proving the

3000alle gations charged in the a dministrative c omplaint s against

3011Respondent by clear and convincing evidence. Dep't of Banking &

3021Fin. , Div. of Sec. & Investor Prot. v. Osborne Stern & Co. , 670

3034So. 2d 932 (Fla. 1996) (citing Ferris v. Turlington , 510 So. 2d

3046292, 2 94 - 95 (Fla. 1987)); Nair v. Dep't of Bus. & Prof'l Reg. ,

3061654 So. 2d 205, 207 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995).

307043 . Regarding the standard of proof, in Slomowitz v.

3080Walker , 429 So. 2d 797, 800 (Fla. 4th DCA 1983), the c ourt held

3094that clear and convincing evidence requi res that the evidence

3104must be found to be credible; the facts to which the witnesses

3116testify must be distinctly remembered; the testimony must be

3125precise and explicit and the witnesses must be lacking confusion

3135as to the facts in issue. The evidence must be of such weight

3148that it produces in the mind of the trier of fact a firm belief

3162or conviction, without hesitancy, as to the truth of the

3172allegations sought to be established. Id.

317844 . In addition, any disciplinary action must be based only

3189upon the offe nses specifically alleged in the a dministrative

3199c omplaint. See Sternberg v. De p' t of Prof 'l Reg . , Bd . of Med .

3217Exam ' rs , 465 So. 2d 1324, 1325 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985); Kinney v.

3231Dep ' t of State , 501 So. 2d 129, 133 (Fla. 5th DCA 1987); Hunter

3246v. Dep ' t of Prof ' l Reg . , 458 So. 2d 842, 844 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984).

326545 . Section 509.032(6) provides that Petitioner shall adopt

3274such rules as are necessary to carry out the provisions of the

3286c hapter.

328846 . Florida Administrative Code Rule 61C - 1.001(14)

3297(January 1, 2013) states , in pertinent part:

3304Food Code - This term as used in Chapters

331361C - 1, 61C - 3, and 61C - 4, F.A.C., means

3325paragraph 1 - 201.10(B), Chapter 2, Chapter 3,

3333Chapter 4, Chapter 5, Chapter 6, Chapter 7,

3341and Sections 8 - 103.11 and 8 - 103.12 of the

3352Food Code, 2009 Recomme ndations of the United

3360States Public Health Service/Food and Drug

3366Administration including Annex 3: Public

3371Health Reasons/Administrative Guidelines;

3374Annex 5: Conducting Risk - based

3380Inspections(https://www.flrules.org/Gateway/r

3381eference.asp?No=Ref - 01536 ), he rein adopted by

3390reference.

339147 . Rule 61C - 1.005(6) states , in pertinent part:

3401(6) Standard penalties. This section

3406specifies the penalties routinely imposed

3411against licensees and applies to all

3417violations of law subject to a penalty under

3425Chapter 509, F. S.

3429(a) Basic violation.

34321. 1st offense Î Administrative fine of $150

3440to $300.

3442* * *

3445(b) Intermediate violation.

34481. 1st offense Î Administrative fine of $200

3456to $400.

3458* * *

3461(c) High priority violation.

34651. 1st offense - Administ rative fine of $250

3474to $500.

347648 . Rule 61C - 1.005(6)(o) states , in pertinent part:

3486(6) Standard penalties. This section

3491specifies the penalties routinely imposed

3496against licensees and applies to all

3502violations of law subject to a penalty under

3510Chapter 50 9, F.S.

3514* * *

3517(o) Any violation requiring an Order of

3524Emergency Suspension of License and Closure,

3530as authorized by Chapter 509, F.S.

35361. 1st offense Î Administrative fine of

3543$500.

354449 . R ule 61C - 1.005(7)(a)4. states , in pertinent part:

3555(7) Ag gravating or mitigating factors . The

3563division may deviate from the standard

3569penalties in paragraphs (a) through (n) of

3576subsection (6) above, based upon the

3582consideration of aggravating or mitigating

3587factors present in a specific case. The

3594division may de viate from the standard

3601penalties in paragraph (o) of subsection (6)

3608above, based upon the consideration of

3614aggravating factors present in a specific

3620case. The division shall consider the

3626following aggravating and mitigating factors

3631in determining the app ropriate disciplinary

3637action to be imposed and in deviating from

3645the standard penalties:

3648(a) Aggravating f actors .

3653* * *

36564. Number of Emergency Orders of Suspension

3663or Closure against the same licensee filed

3670with the Agency Clerk by the divisio n within

3679the 12 months preceding the date the current

3687administrative complaint was issued.

3691DBPR C ase N o . 2015 - 029646

370050 . Section 509.221(7) states:

3705The operator of any establishment licensed

3711under this chapter shall take effective

3717measures to protect the establishment

3722against the entrance and the breeding on the

3730premises of all vermin. Any room in such

3738establishment infested with such vermin shall

3744be fumigated, disinfected, renovated, or

3749other corrective action taken until the

3755vermin are exterminated.

37585 1. Petitioner proved by clear and convincing evidence that

3768Respondent violated s ection 509.221(7), because numerous live

3776roaches were present on July 1, 2015. The presence of

3786approximately three dozen roaches provides sufficient evidence

3793that any means taken by Respondent to eliminate their entrance or

3804breeding was ineffective.

380752 . The Order of Emergency Suspension of License and

3817Closure contained in Petitioner ' s Exhibit 7 has been reviewed for

3829determination of penalty, and , having been considered, it i s

3839concluded that the July 1, 2015 , violation required an Order of

3850Emergency Suspension of License and Closure. Therefore, r ule

385961C - 1.005(6)(o) is the appropriate penalty guideline for the

3869violation.

387053 . As noted, Respondent is guilty of one violation

3880res ulting in an Emergency Order of Suspension of License and

3891Closure. Pursuant to r ule 61C - 1.005(7), mitigating factors do

3902not apply to the r ule 61C - 1.005(6)(o) penalty guideline.

3913Therefore, a $500 .00 fine is the appropriate penalty.

3922DBPR C ase N o . 2015 - 0425 10

393254 . Food Code Rule 2 - 402.11 states:

3941Effectiveness

3942(A) Except as provided in paragraph (B) of

3950this section, food employees shall wear hair

3957restraints such as hats, hair coverings or

3964nets, beard restraints, and clothing that

3970covers body hair, that are designed and worn

3978to effectively keep their hair from

3984contacting exposed food; clean equipment,

3989utensils, and linens; and unwrapped single -

3996service and single - use articles.

400255 . Petitioner proved by clear and convincing evidence

4011that Respondent violated F ood Code Rule 2 - 402.11, because

4022Respondent ' s employee was observed engaging in food preparation

4032without proper hair restraint s on July 16, 2015 ; September 2,

40432015 ; and September 3, 2015.

404856 . Food Code Rule 4 - 501.11 states , in part:

4059Good Repair and Proper Adjustment

4064(A) Equipment shall be maintained in a state

4072of repair and condition that meets the

4079requirements specified under Parts 4 - 1

4086and 4 - 2.

4090(B) Equipment components such as doors,

4096seals, hinges, fasteners, and kick plates

4102shall be kept intact, tight , and adjusted

4109in accordance with manufacturer's

4113specifications.

411457 . Petitioner proved by clear and convincing evidence that

4124Respondent violated Food Code Rule 4 - 501.11, because the freezer

4135chest door was observed in disrepair with exposed filament

4144(insu lation) on July 16, 2015 ; July 17, 2015 ; September 2, 2015 ;

4156and September 3, 2015.

416058 . Section 509.221(7) states:

4165The operator of any establishment licensed

4171under this chapter shall take effective

4177measures to protect the establishment against

4183the entrance and the breeding on the premises

4191of all vermin. Any room in such

4198establishment infested with such vermin shall

4204be fumigated, disinfected, renovated, or

4209other corrective action taken until the

4215vermin are exterminated.

421859 . A public food service establish ment has violated

4228s ection 509.221(7), if vermin, such as roaches, are present in

4239the establishment or there is evidence of their presence in the

4250establishment, even if measures were taken to prevent their

4259entrance and breeding. See Dep ' t of Bus. & Prof ' l Reg. v.

4274Brother & Sister ' s Barbeque, Inc. , Case No. 06 - 5338 (Fla. DOAH

4288June 22, 2007; Fla. DBPR July 31, 2007) (Respondent violated Food

4299Code Rule 6 - 501.111, where Massey Services had treated the

4310establishment two days before the inspector observed rodent

4318droppings during an inspection.) ; and Dep ' t of Bus. & Prof ' l Reg.

4333v. Subway No. 32148 , Case No. 12 - 3871 (Fla. DOAH May 10, 2013;

4347Fla. DBPR June 6, 2013) (Respondent violated Food Code Rule 6 -

4359501.111, because of the observed presence of 17 live roaches

4369duri ng inspection establishes that Respondent ' s efforts to

4379control pests were inadequate and ineffective . ).

438760 . The cited cases involved violations of Food Code

4397Rule 6 - 501.111 (2001). This requirement is similar to the

4408requirements of s ection 509.221(7). Fo od Code Rule 6 - 501.111

4420required an establishment to control insects, rodents, and

4428other pests to minimize their presence on the premises by:

4438(A) routinely inspecting incoming shipments of food and supplies;

4447(B) routinely inspecting the premises for evidenc e of pests;

4457(C) using methods, if pests are found, such as trapping devices

4468or other means of pest control as specified under Food Code

4479Rules 7 - 202.12, 7 - 206.12, and 7 - 206.13; and (D) eliminating

4493harborage conditions.

449561. Similarly, s ection 509.221(7) req uires an establishment

4504to take effective measures to protect the establishment against

4513the entrance and the breeding on the premises of all vermin.

4524Evidence of rodents and the presence of live roaches violated

4534Food Code Rule 6 - 501.111 , because they establ ish the measures

4546taken to control pests were inadequate and ineffective.

4554Likewise, the presence of more than 20 live roaches establishes

4564that Respondent failed to take effective measures to prevent the

4574entrance and breeding of roaches.

457962 . Petitioner pro ved by clear and convincing evidence that

4590Respondent violated s ection 509.221(7), because numerous live

4598roaches were present on July 16, 2015 ; September 2, 2015 ; and

4609September 3, 2015. The presence of roaches during the three

4619inspections establishes that any means taken by Respondent to

4628eliminate their entrance or breeding was ineffective.

463563. Food Code Rule 6 - 202.15(A) and (C) states , in pertinent

4647part:

4648Outer Openings, Protected .

4652(A) Except as specified in ¶¶ (B), (C), and

4661(E) and under ¶ (D) of this section, outer

4670openings of a food establishment shall be

4677protected against the entry of insects and

4684rodents by:

4686(1) Filling or closing holes and other gaps

4694along floors, walls, and ceilings;

4699(2) C losed, tight - fitting windows; and

4707(3) Solid, self - clos ing, tight - fitting

4716doors.

4717* * *

4720(C) Exterior doors used as exits need not be

4729self - closing if they are:

4735(1) Solid and tight - fitting [.]

474264. Petitioner proved by clear and convincing evi dence that

4752Respondent violated Food Code Rule 6 - 202.15(A) , (C) , and (D) due

4764to having outer doors which were not sufficiently self - closing or

4776secured.

477765 . Section 509.039 states, in part:

4784Food service manager certification - It is

4791the duty of the division to adopt, by rule,

4800food safety protection standards for t he

4807training and certification of all food

4813service managers who are responsible for the

4820storage, preparation, display, or serving of

4826foods to the public in establishments

4832regulated under this chapter. The standards

4838adopted by the division shall be consiste nt

4846with the Standards for Accreditation of Food

4853Protection Manager Certification Programs

4857adopted by the Conference for Food

4863Protection. These standards are to be

4869adopted by the division to ensure that, upon

4877successfully passing a test, approved by the

4884Co nference for Food Protection, a manager of

4892a food service establishment shall have

4898demonstrated a knowledge of basic food

4904protection practices.

490666 . Petitioner proved by clear and convincing evidence that

4916Respondent violated s ection 509.039, because Resp ondent failed to

4926provide proof of food manager certification for its manager upon

4936request on July 16, 2015 ; July 17, 2015 ; September 2, 2015 ; and

4948September 3, 2015.

495167 . Section 509.049(5) states:

4956It shall be the duty of each public food

4965service establishm ent to provide training in

4972accordance with the described rule to all

4979food service employees of the public food

4986service establishment. The public food

4991service establishment may designate any

4996certified food service manager to perform

5002this function. Food se rvice employees must

5009receive certification within 60 days after

5015employment. Certification pursuant to this

5020section shall remain valid for 3 years. All

5028public food service establishments must

5033provide the division with proof of employee

5040training upon reque st, including but not

5047limited to, at the time of any division

5055inspection of the establishment. Proof of

5061training for each food service employee shall

5068include the name of the trained employee, the

5076date of birth of the trained employee, the

5084date the trainin g occurred, and the approved

5092food safety training program used.

509768 . Petitioner proved by clear and convincing evidence that

5107Respondent violated s ection 509.049(5), because Respondent failed

5115to provide proof of the required state - approved employee traini ng

5127for its employees upon request on July 16, 2015 ; July 17, 2015 ;

5139September 2, 2015 ; and September 3, 2015.

514669. T he Order of Emergency Suspension of License and

5156Closure contained in Petitioner ' s Exhibit 7 has been reviewed for

5168determination of penalty, a nd , having been considered, it is also

5179concluded that an Emergency Order of Suspension and Closure was

5189filed against Respondent with the a gency c lerk by the D ivision

5202within the 12 months preceding the Administrative Complaint dated

5211September 30, 2015, and is an aggravating factor with regard to

5222the violations cited in that Administrative Complaint.

522970. As noted, Respondent is guilty of three basic

5238violations, two intermediate violations , and one high priority

5246violation. A reasonable fine in this case is $ 225 .00 for each

5259basic violation, $300 .00 for each intermediate violation, and

5268$375 .00 for the high priority violation, for a total fine of

5280$1,650. 00.

5283RECOMMENDATION

5284Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

5294Law, it is RECOMMENDED that a f i nal o rder be entered by the

5309Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Division of

5317Hotels and Restaurant s , ordering Latchman ' s Seafood Market and

5328Grill, Inc., d/b/a Latchman ' s Seafood Market and Grill, Inc., to

5340pay an administrative penalty in the amount of $500.00 for the

5351violation listed above in DBPR Case No. 2015 - 029646 and an

5363administrative penalty in the amount of $1,650.00 in DBPR Case

5374No. 2015 - 042510, for a total administrative penalty of $2,150.00,

5386plus any applicable and authorized invest igative expenses or

5395costs, due and payable to the Department of Business and

5405Professional Regulation, Division of Hotels and Restaurants,

54121940 North Monroe Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 1011, within

542230 calendar days of the date of th e final o rder .

5435DON E AND ENTERED this 5th day of May , 2016 , in Tallahassee,

5447Leon County, Florida.

5450S

5451ROBERT L. KILBRIDE

5454Administrative Law Judge

5457Division of Administrative Hearings

5461The DeSoto Building

54641230 Apalachee Parkway

5467Tallahassee, Flor ida 32399 - 3060

5473(850) 488 - 9675

5477Fax Filing (850) 921 - 6847

5483www.doah.state.fl.us

5484Filed with the Clerk of the

5490Division of Administrative Hearings

5494this 5th day of May , 2016 .

5501ENDNOTE S

55031/ References to Florida Statutes are to the 2015 version, unless

5514otherwi se indicated.

55172/ References to Food Code rules are to the 2009 version, unless

5529otherwise indicated.

55313/ References to Florida Administrative Code rules are to the

5541May 31, 2015, version, unless otherwise indicated.

5548COPIES FURNISHED:

5550Ricardo Latchman

5552La tchman's Seafood Market

5556and Grill, Inc.

5559117 North State Road 7

5564Plantation, Florida 33317

5567Charles F. Tunnicliff, Esquire

5571Charles LaRay Dewrell, Esquire

5575Department of Business and

5579Professional Regulation

55811940 North Monroe Street , Suite 42

5587Tallahassee, Florida 32399

5590(eServed)

5591Rick Akin , Director

5594Division of Hotels and Restaurants

5599Department of Business and

5603Professional Regulation

5605Northwood Centre

56071940 North Monroe Street

5611Tallahassee, Florida 32399

5614(eServed)

5615Jason Maine , General Counsel

5619Department of Business and

5623Professional Regulation

5625Northwood Centre

56271940 North Monroe Street

5631Tallahassee, Florida 32399

5634(eServed)

5635NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

5641All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within

565115 days from the date of this R ecommended Order. Any exceptions

5663to this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that

5674will issue the Final Order in this case.

Select the PDF icon to view the document.
PDF
Date
Proceedings
PDF:
Date: 06/08/2016
Proceedings: Agency Final Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 06/07/2016
Proceedings: Agency Final Order
PDF:
Date: 06/07/2016
Proceedings: Agency Final Order
PDF:
Date: 05/05/2016
Proceedings: Recommended Order
PDF:
Date: 05/05/2016
Proceedings: Recommended Order (hearing held March 10, 2016). CASE CLOSED.
PDF:
Date: 05/05/2016
Proceedings: Recommended Order cover letter identifying the hearing record referred to the Agency.
PDF:
Date: 04/18/2016
Proceedings: Petitioner's Proposed Recommended Order filed.
Date: 04/08/2016
Proceedings: Transcript of Proceedings (not available for viewing) filed.
Date: 03/10/2016
Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
PDF:
Date: 03/02/2016
Proceedings: Letter to Judge Kilbride from Charles Dewrell enclosing Petitioner's Exhibits filed (exhibits numbered 1-7; not available for viewing).
PDF:
Date: 03/02/2016
Proceedings: Petitioner's Witness List filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/02/2016
Proceedings: Petitioner's Exhibit List filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/02/2016
Proceedings: Transmittal Letter filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/08/2016
Proceedings: Order of Pre-hearing Instructions.
PDF:
Date: 01/08/2016
Proceedings: Notice of Hearing by Video Teleconference (hearing set for March 10, 2016; 9:30 a.m.; Lauderdale Lakes and Tallahassee, FL).
PDF:
Date: 01/06/2016
Proceedings: Corrected Response to Initial Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/06/2016
Proceedings: Response to Initial Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/06/2016
Proceedings: Order of Consolidation (DOAH Case Nos. 15-7347, 15-7350).
PDF:
Date: 12/30/2015
Proceedings: Initial Order.
PDF:
Date: 12/29/2015
Proceedings: Administrative Complaint filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/29/2015
Proceedings: Election of Rights filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/29/2015
Proceedings: Agency referral filed.

Case Information

Judge:
ROBERT L. KILBRIDE
Date Filed:
12/29/2015
Date Assignment:
12/30/2015
Last Docket Entry:
06/08/2016
Location:
Lauderdale Lakes, Florida
District:
Southern
Agency:
ADOPTED IN TOTO
 

Counsels

Related Florida Statute(s) (13):