18-006578 Department Of Business And Professional Regulation vs. Ricky Lee Diemer
 Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Monday, April 1, 2019.


View Dockets  
Summary: The Department proved by clear and convincing evidence that the Respondent engaged in unlicensed construction and electrical contracting.

1STATE OF FLORIDA

4DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

8DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND

12PROFESSIONAL REGULATION,

14Petitioner,

15vs. Case Nos. 18 - 6578

2118 - 6579

24RICKY LEE DIEMER,

27Respondent.

28_______________________________/

29RECOMMENDE D ORDER

32Pursuant to notice, a final hearing was conducted on

41February 19, 2019, in Tallahassee, Florida, before Garnett W.

50Chisenhall, a duly designated Administrative Law Judge of the

59Division of Administrative Hearings (ÐDOAHÑ).

64APPEARANCES

65For Petition er: Carlos Conrado Lloreda, Esquire

72Jackson Alexander Pellingra, Esquire

76Mike Joseph Gordon, Esquire

80Department of Business

83and Professional Regulation

862601 Blair Stone Road

90Tallahassee, Florida 32399

93For Respondent: No Appearance

97STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE S

102The issue is whether Respondent (ÐRicky Lee DiemerÑ) offered

111to engage in unlicensed contracting as alleged in the

120Administrative Complaint , and, if so, what penalty should be

129imposed.

130PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

132The Department of Business and Professiona l Regulation

140(Ðthe DepartmentÑ) issued a two - count Administrative Complaint

149on July 10, 2018, alleging that Mr. Diemer violated

158section 489.127(1)(f), Florida Statutes (2017) , 1/ by advertising

166Ðregulated electrical contracting services via the Internet at

174craigslist.org for compensation in FloridaÑ on or about

182January 12, 2018. The Administrative Complaint also alleged that

191Mr. Diemer violated section 455.227(1)(q), Florida Statutes, Ðby

199practicing electrical contracting [at 403 4 Blairs t one Road,

209Talla hassee, Florida 32311 - 3307] without the requisite license,

219in violation of section 489.531(1)(a), Florida Statutes.Ñ

226Mr. Diemer disputed the Administrative ComplaintÓs

232allegations, and the Department referred this matter to DOAH on

242December 17, 2018, wher e it was assigned DOAH Case N o. 18 - 6579.

257The Department issued another two - count Administrative

265Complaint on July 11, 2018, alleging that Mr. Diemer violated

275section 489.127(1)(f), by advertising Ðregulated construction

281contracting services via the Interne t at craiglist.org for

290compensation in FloridaÑ on or about January 12, 2018. The

300Administrative Complaint also alleged that Mr. Diemer violated

308section 489.13(1), by offering Ðregulated construction

314contracting services, including but not limited to, rem oval and

324replacement of exterior doors and [a] kitchen sink at 4034

334Blairstone Road, Tallahassee, Florida 32311 - 3307Ñ on

342approximately February 7, 2018.

346Mr. Diemer also disputed this Administrative ComplaintÓs

353allegations, and the Department referred thi s matter to DOAH on

364December 17, 2018, where it was assigned DOAH C ase N o. 18 - 6578.

379On December 21, 2018, the undersigned issued an Order

388consolidating DOAH C a se N os. 18 - 6578 and 18 - 6579. The

403undersigned also issued a n otice scheduling the final hearing f or

415February 19, 2019.

418On December 26, 2018, Mr. Diemer filed a ÐRequest for

428DismissalÑ asking the undersigned to dismiss the instant case.

437The undersigned construed the aforementioned pleading as a m otion

447to d ismiss and issued an Order on January 4, 20 19, denying the

461m otion to d ismiss.

466The Department filed a ÐMotion to Deem Admissions Admitted &

476Relinquish JurisdictionÑ (Ðthe Motion to RelinquishÑ) on

483February 8, 2019. In support of its request that DOAH relinquish

494jurisdiction over this matter, the Department asserted that

502Mr. Diemer had failed to respond to any of the DepartmentÓs

513discovery requests, including requests for admissions.

519On February 15, 2019, the undersigned issued an Order

528denying the m otion to r elinquish , in part , because there was Ðno

541indication that the pro se Respondent was aware of the

551consequences associated with being nonresponsive to the discovery

559requests.Ñ

560The final hearing took place as scheduled on

568February 19, 2019. At the outset of the final hearing, the

579Department dismissed its allegation that Mr. Diemer violated

587section 489.127(1)(f), Florida Statutes, by advertising

593Ðregulated electrical contracting services via the Internet at

601craigslist.org for compensation in FloridaÑ on or about

609January 12, 201 9 , as alleged in Count Two of the Administrative

621Complaint in DOAH Case No. 18 - 6579 . During the remainder of the

635final hearing, the Department presented testimony from two

643employees , Donald Jacobs and Andrew Mazyck, who had performed the

653undercover investigation on whi ch the Administrative Complaints

661were based. The undersigned accepted t he Department Exhibits 1

671through 3 , 5 and 6 into evidence.

678Mr. Diemer did not appear at the final hearing and gave no

690indication afterwards that he had been unable to attend.

699The one - volume T ranscript from the final hearing was filed

711on February 28, 2019. The Department filed a timely p roposed

722r ecommended o rder on March 8, 2019. Mr. Diemer filed a r esponse

736to the DepartmentÓs p roposed r ecommended o rder on March 11, 2019.

749FINDING S OF FACT

753Based on the oral and documentary evidence adduced at the

763final hearing, matters subject to official recognition, and the

772entire record in this proceeding, the following Findings of Fact

782are made:

7841. The Department is the state agency responsible

792for regulating the practice of contracting pursuant to

800section 20.165, Florida Statutes, and chapters 455 and 489,

809p art I, Florida Statutes.

8142. The Department initiated an undercover operation by

822gaining access to a house needing numerous repairs. The

831Department employees then utilized websites , such as Craigslist

839and HomeAdvisor , to identify people offering unlicensed

846contracting services.

8483. The Department employees found an advertisement posted

856by ÐRLD Handyman ServicesÑ on December 26, 2017, offering to

866perform multiple types of contracting work. This advertisement

874caught the DepartmentÓs attention because it did not li st a

885contracting license number. S ection 489.119(5)(b), requires

892every advertisement for contracting services to list such a

901number . 2/

9044. The advertisement listed a phone number, and the

913Department utilized the Accurint phone system to ascertain that

922the aforementioned phone number belonged to Mr. Diemer.

9305. The Department examined its records and ascertained that

939Mr. Dieme r was not licensed to perform construction or electrical

950contracting in Florida.

9536. The Department contacted Mr. Diemer and approximately 12

962other people offering contracting services and scheduled

969appointments for those people to discuss contracting wor k with an

980undercover Department employee at the house mentioned above.

9887. An undercover Department employee told Mr. Diemer and

997the other prospective contractors that he had recently bought the

1007house and was hoping to sell it for a profit after making s ome

1021quick repairs.

10238. An undercover Department employee met Mr. Diemer at the

1033house and described their resulting conversation as follows:

1041A : We looked at remodeling a deck on the

1051back, the southern portion of the home. We

1059looked at cabinets, flooring and painting

1065that are nonregulated in nature, but also

1072plumbing and general contracting services

1077such as exterior doors that needed to be

1085replaced, and the electrical, some appliances

1091and light fixtures.

1094Q : All right. So was there any follow - up

1105communi cation from Mr. Diemer after your

1112discussion at the house?

1116A : Yes. We walked around the house. He

1125looked at the renovations that we were

1132asking. He took some mental notes as I

1140recall. He didnÓt make any written notes as

1148some of the others had done. He did it all

1158in his head, said that he was working on

1167another project in the Southwood area at the

1175time and just left his work crew there to

1184come and visit with me and was rushed for

1193time. So he was in and out of there in 10 to

120515 minutes. It was pretty quick.

1211Q : Okay.

1214A : But he took the mental notes and said

1224that he would go back and write something up

1233and send me a proposal through our

1240Gmail . . . .

12459. On February 7, 2018, Mr. Diemer transmitted an e - mail to

1258the DepartmentÓs fictitious Gmail ac count offering to perform

1267multiple types of work that require a contracting license:

1276kitchen sink installation, bathroom remodeling, construction of

1283an elevated deck and walkway, installation of light fixtures, and

1293installation of front and back doors . 3/ Mr. Diemer proposed to

1305perform the aforementioned tasks for $13,200.00 . 4/

131410. The work described in Mr. DiemerÓs e - mail poses a

1326danger to the public if done incorrectly or by unlicensed

1336personnel . 5/

133911. The Department incurred costs of $118.55 for DO AH C ase

1351N o. 18 - 6578 and $91.45 for DOAH Case No . 18 - 6579.

136612. The Department proved by clear and convincing evidence

1375that Mr. Diemer advertised or offered to practice construction

1384contracting without holding the requisite license. The

1391Department also pro ved by clear and convincing evidence that

1401Mr. Diemer practiced construction and electrical contracting when

1409he transmitted the February 7, 2018, e - mail.

1418CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

142113. DOAH has jurisdiction over the parties to and the

1431subject matter of this proc eeding pursuant to sections 120.569

1441and 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.

144514. The Department has the burden of proving the

1454allegations in the Administrative Complaint by clear and

1462convincing evidence. See DepÓt of Banking & Fin . v. Osborne,

1473Stern & Co. , 670 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 1996).

148215. The clear and convincing evidence standard requires

1490that the evidence Ðmust be of such weight that it produces in the

1503mind of the trier of fact a firm belief or conviction, without

1515hesitancy, as to the truth of the allegations sought to be

1526established. Ñ In re Davey , 645 So. 2d 398, 404 (Fla. 1994).

153816. Contractin g is regulated under p art I of c hapter 489.

1551See §§ 489.101 - 146, Fla. Stat.

155817. ÐContractorÑ is defined as:

1563[T]he person who . . . for compensation,

1571undertakes to, submits a bid to, or does

1579himself or herself or by others construct,

1586repair, alter, remodel, add to, demolish,

1592subtract from, or improve any building or

1599structure, including related improvements to

1604real estate, for others . . . .

1612§ 489.105(3), Fla. Stat.

161618. ÐContractingÑ is defined to mean:

1622[E]ngaging in business as a contractor and

1629includes, but is not limited to, performance

1636of any of the acts as set forth in subsection

1646(3) which define types of contractors. The

1653attempted sale of contracting service s and

1660the negotiation or bid for a contract on

1668these services also constitutes contracting.

1673If the services offered require licensure or

1680agent qualification, the offering,

1684negotiation for a bid, or attempted sale of

1692these services requires the correspondi ng

1698licensure . . . .

1703§ 489.105(6), Fla. Stat. (emphasis added).

170919. Section 489.127(1)(f ) provides that no person shall

1718engage :

1720[I] n the business or act in the capacity of a

1731contractor or advertise himself or herself or

1738a business organization as av ailable to

1745engage in the business or act in the capacity

1754of a contractor without being duly registered

1761or certified.

176320. The Department provided by clear and convincing

1771evidence that Mr. Diemer violated section 489.127(1)(f).

177821. Section 489.13 provid es in pertinent part that

1787(1) Any person performing an activity

1793requiring licensure under this part as a

1800construction contractor is guilty of

1805unlicensed contracting if he or she does not

1813hold a valid active certificate or

1819registration authorizing him or h er to

1826perform such activity, regardless of whether

1832he or she holds a local construction

1839contractor license or local certificate of

1845competency.

184622. The Department proved by clear and convincing evidence

1855that Mr. Diemer violated section 489.13(1).

186123. The Department also alleges that Mr. Diemer engaged in

1871unlicensed electrical contracting. Section 489.505(12 ) defines

1878an Ðelectrical contractorÑ as :

1883[A] person who conducts business in the

1890electrical trade field and who has the

1897experience, knowledge, an d skill to install,

1904repair, alter, add to, or design, in

1911compliance with law, electrical wiring,

1916fixtures, appliances, apparatus, raceways,

1920conduit, or any part thereof, which

1926generates, transmits, transforms, or utilizes

1931electrical energy in any form, inc luding the

1939electrical installations and systems within

1944plants and substations, all in compliance

1950with applicable plans, specifications, codes,

1955laws, and regulations. The term means any

1962person, firm, or corporation that engages in

1969the business of electrica l contracting under

1976an express or implied contract; or that

1983undertakes, offers to undertake , purports to

1989have the capacity to undertake, or submits a

1997bid to engage in the business of electrical

2005contracting ; or that does itself or by or

2013through others engag e in the business of

2021electrical contracting.

2023§ 489.505(12), Fla. Stat. (emphasis added).

202924. Section 489.531(1)(a ) prohibits one from practicing

2037electrical contracting without being Ðcertified or registered,Ñ

2045and section 455.227(1)(q) subjects one to discipline for

2053violating the practice act governing contractors.

205925. The Department proved by clear and convincing

2067evidence that Mr. Diemer violated section 455.227(1)(q) via

2075section 489.531(1)(a).

207726. Mr . Diemer argued in pleadings filed prior to the final

2089hearing that his work falls under the Ðha ndyman exemptionÑ in

2100section 489 .103(9). The aforementioned statute exempts from

2108licensure Ð[a]ny work or operation of a casual, minor, or

2118inconsequential nature in which the aggregate contract price for

2127labor, materials, and all other items is less than

2136$1,000 . . . .Ñ)

214227. However, the Ðhandyman exemptionÑ is inapplicable to

2150the instant case because Mr. Diemer proposed to perform work

2160requiring licensure for $13,200.00. Also, he proposed to perform

2170all of the work at issue for $35,100.

217928. With regard to the penalty to be imposed,

2188section 489.13(3 ) provides as follows:

2194Notwithstanding s. 455.228, the department

2199may impose an administrative fine of up to

2207$10,000 on any unlicensed person guilty of

2215unlicensed contracting. In addition, the

2220department may assess reasonable

2224investigative and legal costs for prosecution

2230of the violation against the unlicensed

2236contractor. The department may waive up to

2243one - half of any fine imposed if the

2252unlicensed cont ractor complies with

2257certification or registration within 1 year

2263after imposition of the fine under this

2270subsection.

227129. Florida Administrative Code Rule 61 - 5.007 sets forth

2281disciplinary guidelines for unlicensed activity. Rule 61 -

22895.007(5)(a) provides that a first offense for advertising or

2298offering to practice a profession without holding the requisite

2307license is subject to a $1,500.00 administrative fine. Rule 61 -

23195.007(6)(a) provides that a first offense for practicing a

2328profession without holding t he requisite license is subject to a

2339$3,000.00 administrative fine.

234330. The Department proved by clear and convincing evidence

2352that Mr. Diemer committed one violation of advertising unlicensed

2361contracting services. The Department proved by clear and

2369co nvincing evidence that Mr. Diemer committed two additional

2378violations by practicing construction and electrical contracting

2385without a license.

238831. Rule 61 - 5.007(6)(a) indicates that Mr. Diemer should be

2399fined $7,500.00 for the aforementioned violations.

240632. Rule 61 - 5.007(8) sets forth circumstances that may be

2417considered for mitigating or aggravating the guideline penalties.

2425Pertinent to the instant case are factors relating to the danger

2436to the public and the deterrent effect of the penalty imposed.

244733. As noted above, Mr. Diemer offered to perform certain

2457activities that represent a substantial danger to the public if

2467performed poorly. The undersigned concludes that increasing

2474Mr. DiemerÓs administrative fine by $1,500.00 accounts for the

2484dange r posed to the public and deters Mr. Diemer from committing

2496additional offenses in the future . 6/

2503RECOMMENDATION

2504Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of

2514Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Business and

2524Professional Regulation issue a final order requiring Ricky Lee

2533Diemer to pay a $9,000.00 administrative fine and costs of

2544$210.00.

2545DONE AND ENTERED this 1s t day of April , 2019 , in

2556Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

2560S

2561G. W. CHISENHALL

2564Administra tive Law Judge

2568Division of Administrative Hearings

2572The DeSoto Building

25751230 Apalachee Parkway

2578Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3060

2583(850) 488 - 9675

2587Fax Filing (850) 921 - 6847

2593www.doah.state.fl.us

2594Filed with the Clerk of the

2600Division of Administrative Hearings

2604th is 1s t day of April , 2019 .

2613ENDNOTE S

26151/ All statutory references shall be to the 2017 version of the

2627Florida Statutes unless indicated otherwise.

26322/ Mr. DiemerÓs advertisement is a hearsay statement. However,

2641it can form the basis for a finding of fact because it is

2654admissible as a hearsay exception. See § 90.803(18)(a), Fla.

2663Stat. (providing that a statement offered against a party that is

2674the partyÓs own statement is admissible as a hearsay exception).

26843/ Mr. DiemerÓs e - mail is another hearsay statement, but it is

2697also admissible under section 90.803(18)(a), Florida Statutes.

27044/ Mr. DiemerÓs e - mail offered to provide other services that did

2717not require a contracting license. The cost of those services

2727was not included in the calculatio n of the $13,200.00 figure.

2739The cost of all the services Mr. Diemer offered to provide was

2751$35,100.

27535/ Andrew Mazyck, o ne of the DepartmentÓs witnesses , explained

2763during the final hearing why unlicensed contracting is dangerous

2772to the public:

2775The re [are] a lot of safety issues that go

2785into [electrical contracting]. Even

2789installing a kitchen sink you could have your

2797whole kitchen and bottom floor flooded if

2804itÓs not installed properly and sealed

2810properly. In this case no permits would be

2818pulled b ecause heÓs not a licensed individual

2826for the front and back doors or the deck. So

2836all of that can come back on the homeowner.

2845Since [unlicensed contractors] donÓt carry

2850any insurance, the homeowner doesnÓt really

2856have any recourse besides to sue him

2863per sonally and not a business. So

2870[homeowners] can b e hurt financially in that

2878way.

2879The DepartmentÓs other witness , Donald Jacobs, offered

2886similar testimony by explaining that :

2892[T] he homeowner is taken advantage of.

2899TheyÓre usually charged exorbitant f ees.

2905TheyÓre not being permitted. TheyÓre not

2911being inspected, so the homeowner never knows

2918if itÓs being done to Florida standards of

2926the Florida code, would it withstand some of

2934our weather conditions that we have here in

2942north Florida. They also have no recourse

2949should there be shoddy work or some sort of

2958negligence on the part of the contractor.

2965ThereÓs no insurance. There is no workersÓ

2972compensation. If someone were to be injured

2979while on the job site, the homeowner could be

2988held liable. Then th e natural things. If

2996not put up correctly, itÓs liable to fall

3004down. If itÓs not hooked up correctly, itÓs

3012liable to start a fire. You could lose

3020everything by not utilizing a licensed

3026professional.

30276/ In its Proposed Recommended Order, the Departme nt asserted

3037that the penalty should be aggravated because Mr. Diemer has been

3048cited on three previous occasions for unlicensed activity and

3057that his record of unlicensed activity dates back to 2013.

3067However, the aforementioned allegations cannot serve as grounds

3075for aggravating the penalty because the Department offered no

3084evidence at the final hearing to substantiate them.

3092COPIES FURNISHED:

3094Ricky Lee Diemer

3097822 Ridge Road

3100Tallahassee, Florida 32305 - 7039

3105Carlos Conrado Lloreda, Esquire

3109Department of B usiness and Professional Regulation

31162601 Blair Stone Road

3120Tallahassee, Florida 32399

3123(eServed)

3124Jackson Alexander Pellingra, Esquire

3128Department of Business and Professional Regulation

31342601 Blair Stone Road

3138Tallahassee, Florida 32399

3141(eServed)

3142Mike Josep h Gordon, Esquire

3147Department of Business and Professional Regulation

3153Office of the General Counsel

31582601 Blair Stone Road

3162Tallahassee, Florida 32399

3165(eServed)

3166Alison Parker, Deputy General Counsel

3171Office of the General Counsel

3176Department of Business and Professional Regulation

31822601 Blair Stone Road

3186Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 2202

3191(eServed)

3192NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

3198All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within

320815 days from the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptio ns

3220to this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that

3231will issue the Final Order in this case.

Select the PDF icon to view the document.
PDF
Date
Proceedings
PDF:
Date: 09/05/2019
Proceedings: Agency Final Order
PDF:
Date: 09/05/2019
Proceedings: Agency Final Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/01/2019
Proceedings: Recommended Order
PDF:
Date: 04/01/2019
Proceedings: Transmittal letter from Claudia Llado forwarding Petitioner's Exhibit numbered 4, to Petitioner.
PDF:
Date: 04/01/2019
Proceedings: Recommended Order cover letter identifying the hearing record referred to the Agency.
PDF:
Date: 04/01/2019
Proceedings: Recommended Order (hearing held February 19, 2019. CASE CLOSED.
PDF:
Date: 03/11/2019
Proceedings: Respondent's Response to Proposed Falsified Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/08/2019
Proceedings: Petitioner's Proposed Recommended Order (filed in Case No. 18-006579).
PDF:
Date: 03/08/2019
Proceedings: Petitioner's Proposed Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/01/2019
Proceedings: Notice of Filing Transcript.
Date: 02/28/2019
Proceedings: Transcript of Proceedings (not available for viewing) filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/19/2019
Proceedings: Petitioner's Motion for Judicial Recognition filed.
Date: 02/19/2019
Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
PDF:
Date: 02/19/2019
Proceedings: Second Request for Dismissal and Elimination of Case of Department of Professional Regulations vs. Ricky Deamer filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/18/2019
Proceedings: Petitioner's Second Amended Exhibit List (filed in Case No. 18-006579).
PDF:
Date: 02/18/2019
Proceedings: Petitioner's Second Amended Exhibit List filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/18/2019
Proceedings: Petitioner's Amended Exhibit List (filed in Case No. 18-006579).
PDF:
Date: 02/18/2019
Proceedings: Petitioner's Amended Exhibit List filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/18/2019
Proceedings: Order Denying "Request for Withdrawal of Depostition Notice".
PDF:
Date: 02/15/2019
Proceedings: Order Denying Petitioner's "Motion to Deem Admissions Admitted and Relinquish Jurisdiction".
PDF:
Date: 02/12/2019
Proceedings: Petitioner's Exhibit List filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/12/2019
Proceedings: Petitioner's Witness List filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/12/2019
Proceedings: Petitioner's Exhibit List (filed in Case No. 18-006579).
PDF:
Date: 02/12/2019
Proceedings: Petitioner's Witness List (filed in Case No. 18-006579).
PDF:
Date: 02/08/2019
Proceedings: Petitioner's Motion to Deem Admissions Admitted & Relinquish Jurisdiction filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/08/2019
Proceedings: Petitioner's Motion to Deem Admissions Admitted & Relinquish Jurisdiction (filed in Case No. 18-006579).
PDF:
Date: 02/05/2019
Proceedings: Request for Withdrawl of Deposition Notice filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/15/2019
Proceedings: Department's Notice of Taking Deposition filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/15/2019
Proceedings: Department's Notice of Taking Deposition (filed in Case No. 18-006579).
PDF:
Date: 01/04/2019
Proceedings: Amended Order Denying Motion to Dismiss.
PDF:
Date: 01/04/2019
Proceedings: Order Denying Continuance of Final Hearing.
PDF:
Date: 12/26/2018
Proceedings: Request for Dismissal filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/21/2018
Proceedings: Order of Pre-hearing Instructions.
PDF:
Date: 12/21/2018
Proceedings: Notice of Hearing (hearing set for February 19, 2019; 9:00 a.m.; Tallahassee, FL).
PDF:
Date: 12/21/2018
Proceedings: Order of Consolidation (DOAH Case Nos. 18-6578, 18-6579).
PDF:
Date: 12/20/2018
Proceedings: Notice of Petitioner's First Interlocking Discovery Request filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/20/2018
Proceedings: Joint Response to Initial Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/20/2018
Proceedings: Notice of Substitution of Counsel (Carlos Lloreda) filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/18/2018
Proceedings: Initial Order.
PDF:
Date: 12/17/2018
Proceedings: Election of Rights filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/17/2018
Proceedings: Response filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/17/2018
Proceedings: Administrative Complaint filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/17/2018
Proceedings: Agency referral filed.

Case Information

Judge:
G. W. CHISENHALL
Date Filed:
12/17/2018
Date Assignment:
12/18/2018
Last Docket Entry:
09/05/2019
Location:
Tallahassee, Florida
District:
Northern
Agency:
Other
 

Counsels

Related DOAH Cases(s) (2):

Related Florida Statute(s) (14):