20-003760 Dar Real Estate Enterprises, Llc vs. Fedora L. Campbell And Department Of Environmental Protection
 Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Monday, June 7, 2021.


View Dockets  
Summary: A preponderance of the evidence demonstrates that all applicable standards, guidelines, and other permitting requirements are met, and clearly justify the issuance of a CCCL permit for the proposed Project.

1S TATE OF F LORIDA

6D IVISION OF A DMINISTRATIVE H EARINGS

13D AVID M ORRIS A ND L ING L IU ,

23Petitioners ,

24vs. Case No. 20 - 3759

30F EDORA L. C AMPBELL A ND D EPARTMENT

39OF E NVIRONMENTAL P ROTECTION ,

44Respondents .

46/

47D AR R EAL E STATE E NTERPRISES , LLC ,

56Petitioner ,

57vs. Case No. 20 - 3760

63F EDORA L. C AMPBELL A ND D EPARTMENT

72OF E NVIRONMENTAL P ROTECTION ,

77Respondents .

79/

80R ICHARD J. T HEIDEL ,

85Petitioner ,

86vs. Case No. 20 - 3786

92F EDORA L. C AMPBELL A ND D EPARTMENT

101OF E NVIRONMENTAL P ROTECTION ,

106Respondents .

108/

109R ECOMMENDED O RDER

113A duly noticed final hearing was held in th ese consolidated case s on

127February 8 through 10, 12, 15, 16, and 18, 2021, before the Hon orable

141Francine M. Ffolkes, a duly - designated Administrative Law Judge with the

153Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH).

158A PPEARANCES

160For Petitioners: David Mark Levin, Esquire

166Icard, Merrill, Cullis, Timm, Furen

171& Ginsburg, P.A.

174Suite 600

1762033 Main Street

179Sarasota, Florida 34237

182For Respondent Campbell: Richard Green, Esquire

188Lewis, Longman & Walker, P.A.

193Suite 501 - S

197100 Second Avenue South

201St. Petersburg, Florida 33701

205Kevin S. Hennessy, Esquire

209Lewis, Longman & Walker, P.A.

214Suite 620

216101 Riverfront Boulevard

219Bradenton, Florida 34205

222For Respondent DEP: Kelley F. Corbari, Esquire

229Alexis Montiglio, Esquire

232Department of Environmental Protection

236Mail Station 35

2393900 Commonwealth Boulevard

242Tallahassee, Florida 32399

245S TATEMENT OF THE I SSUE

251The issue to be determined in th ese consolidated case s is whether

264Respondent , Fedora L. Campbell (Campbell) , is entitled to a coastal

274construction control line (CCCL) permit to construct a single - family residence

286and associated structures seaward of the CCCL on Anna Maria Island, in

298Manatee County, Florida.

301P RELIMINARY S TATEMENT

305On June 25, 2020, Respondent, De partment of Environmental Protection

315(DEP), issued a CCCL permit to Respondent Campbell to construct a

326single - family residence and associated structures on Anna Maria Island.

337On August 3, 202 0 , Petitioners , David Morris and Ling Liu, DAR Real Estate

351Ente rprises, LLC, and Richard J. Theidel ( Co - Petitioners), filed three

364separate petitions challenging DEP's decision to issue the CCCL permit.

374Petitioners Graham Hanson and Hazel Hanson (Hanson Petitioners ) filed a

385petition on August 5, 2020. DEP referred the petitions to DOAH . The

398petitions were consolidated and scheduled for a final evidentiary hearing.

408Respondents filed their Joint Prehearing Stipulation on January 29, 2021.

418The Co - Petitioners filed their Joint Prehearing Stipulation on the same day,

431follo wed by their Amended Joint Prehearing Stipulation on February 1, 2021.

443Finally, on February 3, 2021, The Co - Petitioners filed their Second Amended

456Joint Prehearing Stipulation.

459At the final hearing , Respondent Campbell presented the fact testimony

469of Fe dora L. Campbell ; the expert testimony of Brett D. Moore (Moore) ,

482accepted as an expert in coastal engineering and CCCL permitting;

492Marc Damon (Damon), accepted as an expert in coastal hydrodynamic

502modeling; Alec Hoffner (Hoffner), accepted as an expert in coastal ecology;

513and Doug W. Aarons (Aarons). Respondent Campbell's E xhibits A - 1, A - 6

528through A - 9, A - 12, A - 15 through A - 17, A - 31, and A - 32 , were admitted into

552evidence. Respondent Campbell Demonstrative Exhibit No. 1 was admitted

561i nto evidence.

564Respon dent DEP also presented the expert testimony of Mr. Aarons ,

575accepted as an expert in civil engineering and coastal engineering processes .

587Respondent DEP's exhibits FDEP 1, 2, 4, and 5 (Bates 822 through 825),

600w ere admitted into eviden ce. FDEP Demonstrative Exhibit No. 1 was

612admitted into evidence. Respondents' Joint Exhibits J - 1 through J - 6, were

626also admitted into evidence.

630Co - Petitioners presented the fact testimony of Graham Hanson,

640Ste v en Hanson, David Morris, David A. Ridley (Ridley) , Richard J. Theidel,

653Tony McNeal (McNeal) , and Rolando Gomez (Gomez) by deposition.

662Co - Petitioners presented the expert testimony of Michael Walther (Walther) ,

673accepted as an expert in coastal engineering. Co - Petitioners' E xhibits P - 7

688through P - 13, P - 17 ( subparts 1 through 4, 7 through 9, 16 ) P - 24, and P - 27

712(Bates 1994 through 2002), were admitted into evidence.

720After the final hearing , the Hanson Petitioners sold their home on Anna

732Maria Island and voluntarily dismissed their petition. On April 30, 2021, the

744undersigned issued an Order Closing File in DOAH Case No. 20 - 378 8.

758The 13 - volume Transcript of the final hearing was filed with DOAH on

772April 26, 2021. All parties filed proposed recommended orders on May 17,

7842021, that were carefully considered in the preparation of this Recommended

795Order.

796References to the Florida Statutes are to the 2020 version unless

807otherwise stated.

809F INDINGS OF F ACT

814The following Findings of Fact are based on the stipulations of the

826parties and the evidence ad duced at the final hearing.

836Parties

8371. Respondent Campbell owns an undeveloped lot located at 105 Elm

848Avenue, Anna Maria , in Manatee County, Florida (Campbell Property),

857where she proposes to construct a residence and related structures that are

869authorized by the CCCL permit challenged by Petitioners.

8772. At the time of the final hearing, the Hanson Petitioners were the record

891owners of the property located at 107 Elm Avenue , Anna Maria (Hanson

903Property) , which is located adjacent to and landward of the Campbell

914P roperty. From the Hanson Property, there is currently an unobstructed view

926of the Gulf of Mexico across the undeveloped Campbell Property , a dune

938system , and the beach.

9423. Petitioner s , Morris and Ling Liu , are the record owners of the prope rty

957located at 108 Elm Avenue , Anna Maria (Morris Property) . This property is

970located on the west side of Elm Avenue, directly across and northwest of the

984Hanson P roperty. From the Morris Property, there is currently an

995unobstructed view of the Gulf of Mex ico acr oss at least two private ly owned

1011undeveloped lots , a dune system , and the beach.

10194. Petitioner, DAR Real Estate Enterprises, LLC, is the record owner of

1031the property located at 109 Sycamore Avenue , Anna Maria (DAR Property).

1042This property is locate d directly adjacent and west of the Morris P roperty.

1056From the DAR Property, there is currently an unobstructed view of the Gulf

1069of Mexico across at least two private ly owned undeveloped lots , a dune

1082system, and the beach.

10865. Petitioner, Richard J. Th ei del, is the record owner of the property

1100located at 100 Sycamore Avenue , Anna Maria ( Th ei del Property). This

1113property is located on the opposite side of Sycamore Avenue, and northwest of

1126the DAR P roperty. From the Th ei del P roperty, there is currently an

1141un obstructed view of the Gulf of Mexico across at least one private ly - owned

1157undeveloped lot , a dune system, and the beach.

11656. DEP is the agency responsible for regulating construction activities

1175seaward of the CCCL pursuant to Part I of Chapter 161, Florida Statutes,

1188and Florida Administrative Code Chapter 62B - 33.

1196The Project Site and Vicinity

12017. DEP established a CCCL for Anna Maria Island in Manatee County .

1214The Campbell Property is located within the local jurisdiction of the City of

1227Anna Maria .

12308. The Campbell Property was platted in 1922 as Lot 9, Block 35, First

1244Addition of Anna Maria Beach Subdivision, prior to the effective date of

1256s ection 161.053, Florida Statutes. Mrs. Campbell does not own another parcel

1268of land immediately adjacent to Ca mpbell Prop erty .

12789. The Campbell Property is located approximately 336 and 312 feet

1289seaward of the CCCL, and approximately 182 and 302 feet to the south of

1303DEP ref erence monument R - 7.

131010. All the beaches of Anna Maria Island are designated " critically eroded "

1322and are included in the State's Strategic Beach Management Plan. T he

1334designation helps DEP identify coastline s around the state that n eed beach

1347restoration. Inclusion in the State's Strategic Beach Management Plans

1356means that a segment of coastline is prioritized for beach restoration funding.

1368The designation is not part of the CCCL permitting process.

137811. The evidence demonstrated that there were two beach nourishment

1388projects on the segment of coastline that includes t he Campbell Property. In

14012002 , approximately 150,000 cubic yards of sand were added to the coastline

1414between DEP reference monuments R7 and R8. In 2011, approximately

142425,000 cubic yards were again added to this segment of coastline. T here is a

1440continuing commitment by federal government to renourish the beach in this

1451segment of coastline until 2043.

145612. Over the last 19 years , since the initial beach nourishment, the

1468coastline seaward of the Campbell Property continued to accrete and t he

1480beach is stable. Th is beach nourishment project was successful.

1490Co - Petitioners ' expert , Mr. Walther, acknowledged that the beach

1501nourishment project was successful and the beach was stable when he

1512testified ten years ago in support of the Hanson app lication for a CCCL

1526permit to build the current residence on the Hanson Property.

153613. In 2001, DEP established an Erosion Control Line (ECL) in advance of

1549the 2002 beach nourishment project. An ECL is a property boundary denoting

1561the landward extent of sta te - owned s ubmerged lands. An ECL is generally a

1577line of prohibition and no major projects may be issued a permit to construct

1591s eaward of an ECL.

159614. The Campbell Property is approximately 80 feet landward of the ECL

1608a nd in excess of 300 feet landward of t he mean high water line (MHWL) of

1625the Gulf of Mexico. The property is densely vegetated with native species, but

1638the site has been impacted by invasive species such as Brazilian pepper and

1651Australian pine.

165315. The preponderance of the evidence demonstrated that a frontal dune

1664system exists seaward of the Campbell Property , which runs from south of

1676the Campbell Property to well north beyond the Campbell Property. The

1687frontal dune is of sufficient continuity, sufficient height for the area, is

1699suf ficiently vegetated to allow structural support, and is appropriate ly

1710configur ed to provide protection to upland properties .

171916. Seaward of the frontal dune system is a wide beach extending down to

1733the water line. The historical analysis of the area indica tes that the beach

1747and dune system show ed continuous growth and stability since 1974 .

175917. The evidence established that most of the Co - Petitioners' homes were

1772constructed in the immediate area of this segment of coastline after 2002.

1784Since 2002, t he front al dune system grew in size and bec a me more stable.

1801Permitting Background

180318. On February 13, 2020, Respondent Campbell applied for a CCCL

1814permit from DEP.

181719. Campbell's CCCL permit application proposed construction of a

1826single - family dwelling seawar d of the CCCL and seaward of the 30 - year

1842erosion projection (30YEP) prepared by DEP for the permit application

1852(Project) .

185420. Respondent Campbell obtained a letter of no objection from the City of

1867Anna Maria that the Project would not contravene local setback

1877requirements. The single - family home would be sited as far landward on the

1891Campbell Property as possible without contravening local setback

1899requirements.

190021. To the north of the Campbell Property is a platted right - of - way

1916known as Elm Avenue, and to the south of the Campbell Property is another

1930right - of - way that runs to the beach called Pine Avenue.

194322. Based on the application submittals and subsequent information

1952provided in response to DEP's r equests for additional information, DEP

1963issued a Not ice to Proceed and Permit for Construction on June 25, 2020 .

197823. The Project dimensions are for two habitable floors, above a first - floor

1992parking slab that is an uninhabitable floor . T he home would be elevated on

2007pilings above the 100 - year storm elevation.

2015Permitting Criteria

201724. Respondent Campbell demonstrated by a preponderance of the

2026evidence that the project meets all relevant rule criteria of rule 62B - 33 . There

2042are no other projects in the immediate area currently pending review by DEP

2055or which were i ssued a permit during the pendency of Respondent Campbell 's

2069p ermit application.

207225. The Project is a single - family structure with no ancillary structures.

2085The Project includes an approximately 18 - foot wide gravel driveway to the

2098north , a one - foot deep swal e to the east, west, and south sides of the

2115single - family structure, as well as the east and west sides of the driveway . A n

2133access staircase would be attached to the northwest side of the single - family

2147structure. The Project also includes exterior lighting and landscaping .

215726. The Project would be constructed in accordance with the applicable

2168Florida Building Code ( FB C) and in a manner to prevent the potential for

2183wind or water - borne debris in the event of a hurricane.

219527. The proposed driveway an d slab would eliminate some natural

2206vegetation, including some sea oats and sea grasses. To mitigate for the

2218P roject's impact to vegetation, Respondent Campbell would install various

2228native, salt - tolera nt v egetation seaward and around the single - family

2242str ucture. DEP reviewed the P roject and determined the P roject would

2255minimize the potential for structure - induced scour and wind and water - borne

2269missiles.

22702 8 . The preponderance of the evidence demonstrated that the Project

2282would be sited more than 140 feet la ndward of the frontal dune. Specifically,

2296the Project would be located approximately 1 1 7 feet from the landward toe of

2311the frontal dune. No construction equipment would access the Campbell

2321Property by way of the Gulf of Mexico. No other activity is permitt ed to

2336traverse or otherwise take place on the frontal dune area. The P roject is sited

2351sufficiently landward of the frontal dune so that construction of the P roject

2364would not have any im pact on the frontal dune.

23742 9 . The preponderance of the evidence demonstrated that the P roject, in

2388conjunction with existing structures, would not have a significant adverse

2398impact on the frontal dune or on marine life. S ignificant adverse impact s are

2413those impacts that cause a measurable i nterference with the natural

2424functioning of the coastline system by: (1) measurably affecting the existing

2435shoreline change rate; (2) significantly interfering with the coastal system's

2445ability to recover from a coastal storm; (3) disturbing topography or

2456vegetation such that the dune system becomes unstable or suffers

2466catastrophic failure or the protective value of the dune system is significantly

2478lowered ; or (4) cause a take of protected marine turtles.

248830. The topography and vegetation of the frontal d u ne is located

2501sufficiently seaward of the Campbell Property such that construction of the

2512Project would not destabilize the frontal dune .

252031. The Project would not remove or disturb in situ sandy soil of the beach

2535and dune system to such a degree that a s ignificant adverse impact would

2549result from either reducing the existing ability of the system to resist erosion

2562during a storm or lowering existing levels of storm protection to upland

2574properties and structures.

257732. The Project w ould not result in an incr ease in shoreline change rates,

2592nor will it interfere with the frontal dune or dune system ' s ability to recover if

2609impacted by a major storm. The preponderance of the evidence showed that

2621the beach and dune system is stable and continue s to grow.

263333. The P roject would not result in the net excavation of the in situ sandy

2649soils seaward of the CCCL. The P roject would add about 75 cubic yards of

2664sand to the Campbell Property.

266934. The Project is designed to minimize erosion - induced surface water

2681runoff within t he beach and dune system and to prevent additional seaward

2694or off - site discharges associated with a coastal storm event.

270535. The Project w ould not direct discharges of water or other fluids in a

2720seaward direction and in a manner that would result in signi ficant adverse

2733impacts. Swales w ould be installed around the property to capture water

2745originating on the property and divert it away from the beach and adjacent

2758properties.

275936. T he P roject would not cause an increase in structure - induced scour of

2775such magnitude during a storm as to result in a significant adverse impact .

2789Scour is caused by water reacting with stationary objects during a storm

2801event and the Project would be constructed in accordance with the FBS ,

2813which contains provisions for reducing sc our events.

282137. Any scour that may result from the Project during a storm event

2834would be localized to the Campbell Property as a result of water interacting

2847with the piles .

28513 8 . The P roject would not interfere with existing public beach access at

2866the end of Elm Avenue .

287239. The Project would not interfere with marine turtle nesting or cause a

2885take of marine turtle habitat. The proposed permit provides adequate special

2896permitting conditions as to the nature, timing, and sequence of construction

2907of permitted activities to provide protection to nesting sea turtles and

2918hatchlings and their habitat.

292240. The Project would be constructed in an area primarily covered with

2934non - native, invasive - species vegetation and not increase adverse impact to

2947the beach and dune system. The proposed permit contains adequate special

2958permitting conditions as to the nature, timing and sequence of construction,

2969and the remediation of construction impacts to protect native salt - tolerant

2981vegetation and native plant communities.

298641 . The Project is located seaward of the 30YEP line as calculated by DEP .

3002The 30YEP is based on DEP's projections of erosion in the area to determine

3016if the Project will be seaward of the seasonal high - water line within 30 years

3032after the date of application for the permit. As such, a 30YEP calculation is

3046site - specific and time - s pecific.

30544 2 . The preponderance of the evidence demonstrated that Respondent

3065Campbell does not own any contiguous lots , and t he Project is located as far

3080landward as practicable on the Camp bell Property considering the local

3091setback requirements.

30934 3 . Petitioners argued that to construct a single - family home seaward of

3108the 30 YEP is imprudent construction. Imprudent construction jeopardizes

3117the stability of the beach and dune system, accelerates erosion, provides

3128inadequate protection to upland structures, endangers adjacent properties, or

3137interferes with public beach access. See § 163.053(1)(a), Fla. Stat.

314744 . The preponderance of the evidence demonstrated that the

3157single - family structure sited significantly landward of the frontal dune,

3168w ould have no impact on the ability of the dune system to provide protection

3183to upland properties, nor w ould the constru ction have any impact on

3196neighboring existing structures.

3199Litigated Issues: Analysis of Frontal Dune

320545. The engineering/modeling analysis supports a finding that a frontal

3215dune exists seaward of the Campbell Property which spans from south of the

3228Campbell Property to the north beyond the Campbell Property.

323746. While it was clear that the modeling supported a finding that the

3250frontal dune not only exists and provides sufficient protective value, this

3261finding is based on more than modeling. Respondent Campbe ll's experts and

3273DEP staff visited the Campbell Property on numerous occasions . Th ose visits

3286included w alking , observing, and taking photographs of the Campbell

3296Property, the dune system and the beach area to determine the existence and

3309protective features of the frontal dune.

331547. Respondent Campbell ' s modeling report demonstrate d that the frontal

3327dune increased in size and height by more than ten feet since 2002. In

3341addition, the photographic evidence demonstrate d that native vegetation on

3351the frontal dune and in the area sign ificantly increased since 2002.

336348. Although there are peaks and lower areas in the dune feature, the

3376entire frontal dune has a higher elevation than the area s seaward and

3389landward.

339049. The Co - Petitioners argued that the public beach access constitute s a

3404break in the frontal dune such that the frontal dune is not continuous.

3417The Co - P etitioners contended that the "break" result s in a northern frontal

3432dune and a southern frontal dune seaward of the Campbell Property.

344350. Respondent Campbell's expert, Mr. Hoffn er, persuasively testified that

3453t hese low areas are common given pedestrian traffic . However, these low

3466areas do not break up the prote ctive value of the frontal dune , as

3480demonstrated by the modeling results.

348551. A frontal dune is defined as "the first natural or manmade mound or

3499bluff of sand which is located landward of the beach and which has sufficient

3513vegetation, height, continuity, and configuration to offer protective value."

3522§ 161.053(5)(a)1., Fla. Stat.

35265 2 . The preponderance of the evidence showed that there is no specific

3540height or size requirements in rule or statute for a frontal dune. The size of

3555dunes and dune systems found on Florida's beaches vary with location.

3566Whether or not a dune qualifies as a f rontal dune is site - specific .

358253. Because the Project would be located seaward of the 30YEP, DEP's

3594Coa stal Engineering and Geology Group performed an independent frontal

3604dune analysis for the Project. DEP's analysis found a frontal dune of

" 3616sufficient vege tation, height, continuity, and configuration to offer protective

3626value " is located approximately 80 feet seaward of the ECL. The frontal dune

3639is consistent with the size, height, and configuration of other frontal dunes

3651found in the area.

365554. In this hear ing, Mr. Walther testified that Anna Maria beach was

3668unstable. To support his argument, he relied on data from DEP showing that

3681the beach decreased in size from 2013 to 2018. However, the same d ata relied

3696upon by Mr. Walther also demonstrates that the fron tal dune increased in

3709height, width, and overall size over the same period. Further , the same data

3722over a longer time period demonstrate s that the beach significantly increased

3734in size over the last 40 years .

374255. The significant net increase in size, including the increase in size since

3755the Co - Petitioners ' homes were permitted, indicates a growing and stable

3768beach system with a stable frontal dune that provides p rotection to upland

3781properties.

3782Litigated Issues: Minimization of Impacts

378756. The requireme nt to minimize impacts means that actions should be

3799taken to limit impacts, not eliminate all impacts. Respondent Campbell

3809minimized potential impacts and provided mitigation so that no significant

3819adverse impact would result.

382357. The proposed single - famil y dwelling is smaller than other structures

3836in the immediate area, including the structures on the DAR and Theidel

3848Properties. The proposed single - family dwelling would be lo cated as far

3861landward as the local government setback requirements allow.

386958. The Project further minimizes potential impacts to the beach and dune

3881system in the following ways: 1) by adding 75 cubic yards of sand to the

3896Campbell Property; 2) by installing turtle - sensitive exterior lighting ; 3) by

3908re moving non - native invasive vegetatio n and planting n ative, salt - tolerant

3923vegetation ; 4) by elevating the first habitable floor to 16.5 feet NAVD, which

3936is four feet above the 100 - year storm elevation; 5) and placing pile caps at 3.5

3953feet below grade. When structural design plans are submitte d with an

3965application for a local government building permit, design of structure will

3976comply with the FBC .

3981Litigated Issues: Cumulative Impacts

398559. E vidence was not presented to suggest that the Project would result in

3999adverse cumulative impacts to the beach, dune system, animal habitats, or

4010adjacent properties.

401260. There are no other projects in the immediate area currently pending

4024review by DEP or which were issued a permit during the pendency of

4037Respondent Campbell's permit application.

4041Litigated Issu es : Line of Construction

404861. The Co - Petitioners ' primary argument in opposition to this permit is

4062that CampbellÔs property is seaward of an established line of construction.

407362. The line of construction analysis stems from construction of the

4084statutory language , which is more fully explored below in the C onclusions of

4097L aw. Factually, the evidence is clear that the Campbell P roperty is not

4111landward of an existing line of homes or other major structures.

412263. Mr. Aarons, the CCCL program administrator for D EP, performed a

" 4134line of construction " analysis for the Campbell permit application using the

4145three methods identified in DEP's training for coastal engineers reviewing

4155permit applications. Mr. Aarons persuasively testified that he could not

4165identify a rea sonably continuous and uniform line of construction relative to

4177the Campbell P roperty.

4181Litigated Issues : Marine Turtles

418664 . Mr. Hoffner testified that marine turtles nest near the frontal dune

4199and do not traverse over the frontal dune to nest in areas landward of th e

4215dune system.

421765 . CampbellÔs property is significantly landward of the frontal dune such

4229that it will have no impact on marine turtlesÔ ability to nest. The

4242Co - Petitioners presented no evidence to dispute this testimony.

4252Litigated Issues: Standing

425566. The Co - Petitioners' claims of potential environmental harms that may

4267result from the Project included flooding, nesting of marine turtles, and

4278impacts to the protective value afforded to their properties by the beach and

4291dune system. The Co - P etitioners were unanimous in their concerns that a

4305Campbell permit would set a precedent and allow development on lots

4316seaward of their homes.

432067. Petitioner Theidel admitted he had no evidence to support his

4331environmental concerns of potential flooding o r windborne missiles . He was

4343c oncerned that approval of the Campbell Project would create a precedent for

4356approval of structures on parcels seaward of his property .

436668. Mr. Ridley, the corporate representative for Petitioner DAR, likewise

4376acknowledged th at his concern was that the permit in this proceeding would

4389set a precedent for future development seaward of his home.

439969. Petitioner Morris testified that the belief that his property was ocean -

4412front was a big component of why he purchased it . He was con cerned that

4428Campbell ' s permit would set a precedent for future development on Anna

4441Maria beach, and that if the property seaward of his home was developed, it

4455would disrupt his view.

445970. Any effects from the construction associated with the proposed Projec t

4471would be localized. The Co - P etitioners ' properties are far enough away so

4486they will not be adversely impacted by the Project.

4495C ONCLUSIONS OF L AW

4500Jurisdiction and Standard of Proof

450571. DOAH has jurisdiction over the parties and the su bject matter of this

4519proceeding under sections 120. 569 and 120.57(1), Fl orida Statutes.

452972. This is a de novo proceeding intended to formulate final agency action

4542rather than to review DEP's preliminary decision to issue the CCCL permit .

4555DEP's preliminary decision is not entitled to a presumption of correctness.

4566See § 120.57(1)(k), Fla. Stat.; see also, Dep ' t. of Transp. v. J.W.C. Co., Inc .,

4583396 So. 2d 778, 785 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Cap e letti Bros., Inc. v. Dep ' t. of Gen .

4604Serv s., 432 So. 2d 1359, 1363 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).

461573. The standard of proof in this case is a preponderance of the evidence.

4629See § 120.57(1)(j), Fla. Stat .

463574. Respondent Campbell bears both the initial burden of going forward

4646with the evidence and the ultimate burden of proving entitlemen t to the

4659permit by a preponderance of the evidence . Respondent Campbell must prove

4671that the Project me e t s the applicable requirements of section 161.053 and

4685chapter 62B - 33.

468975. Section 161.053(4)(a)3. provides that DEP may authorize a structure

4699seaward of a CCCL, upon receipt of an application from a property owner and

" 4713upon consideration of facts and circumstances, including . . . potential effects

4725of the location of the structures or activities, including potential cumulat ive

4737effects of proposed structures or activities upon the beach - dune system,

4749which, in the opinion of the department, clearly justify a permit. "

476076. Rule 62B - 33.005(4) states that DEP " shall issue a permit for

4773construction which an applicant has shown to be clearly justified by

4784demonstrating that all standards, guidelines, and other requirements set

4793forth in the applicable provisions of part I, chapter 161, F.S., and this rule

4807chapter are met ."

481177. Respondent Campbell demonstrated by a preponderance of the

4820evidence that a permit for the P roject is clearly justified because it meets all

4835applicable requirements of part I of chapter 161 and the rules promulgated in

4848chapter 62B - 33 .

4853Standing

485478. In order to demonstrate standing to participate in an administrati ve

4866proceeding, a petitioner must demonstrate: " 1) that he will suffer injury in

4878fact which is of sufficient immediacy to entitle him to a section 120.57

4891hearing, and 2) that his substantial injury is of a type or nature which the

4906pro ceeding is designed to protect." Ameristeel Corp. v. Clark , 691 So. 2d 473,

4920477 (Fla. 1997) . The first aspect of the test deals with the degree of injury and

4937the second with the nature of the injury. Id . ; see also See Agrico Chem. Co. v.

4954Dep't of Envtl. Reg. , 406 So. 2d 478, 482 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981), rev. den ., 415 So.

49722d 1359 (Fla. 1982).

497679. Agrico was not intended as a barrier to participation in proceedings

4988under chapter 120 , by persons who are affected by the potential and

5000foreseeable results of agency act ion. See Peace River/Manasota Reg'l Water

5011Supply Auth. v. IMC Phosphates Co ., 18 So. 3d 1079, 1082 , 10 83 (Fla. 2d DCA

50282009)("[S]tanding is a legal concept that requires a would - be litigant to

5042demonstrate that he or she reasonably expects to be affected by the outcome

5055of the proceedings, either directly or indirectly." (quoting Hayes v.

5065Guardianship of Thompson, 952 So. 2d 498, 505 (Fla. 2006))).

507580. Rather, the intent of Agrico was to preclude parties from intervening

5087in a proceeding where those parties' su bstantial interests are remote and

5099speculative. See Vill. Park Mobile Home Ass'n , Inc. v. Dep't of Bus. Reg ., 506

5114So. 2d 426, 433 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). Standing is a forward - looking concept,

5129not to be confused with prevailing on the merits. In substantial i nterest

5142cases, the question is whether the party's substantial interests "could be"

5153affected by the proposed agency action, or whether the party's substantial

5164interests "could reasonably be affected by the proposed activities." Palm

5174Beach Cty. Envtl. Coal. v. DepÔt of Envtl. Prot. , 14 So. 3d 1076, 1078 (Fla. 4th

5190DCA 2009); St. Johns Riverkeeper, Inc. v. St. Johns River Water Mgmt. Dist .,

520454 So. 3d 1051, 1054 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011)(citing Peace River/Manasota RegÔl

5216Water Supply Auth. v. IMC Phosphates Co. , 18 So. 3d 1079, 1084 (Fla. 2d

5230DCA 2009)).

523281. The Co - Petitioners proved that their substantial environmental

5242interests could reasonably be affected by the Project. The Co - Petitioners do

5255not have to prevail on the merits in order to have standing.

5267Permit Criteria

526982. Every application seeking a CCCL permit from DEP must be reviewed

5281individually at the time the application is received . See § 161.053, Fla. Stat.

5295Rule 62B - 33.005(3)(a) provides that " [e]ach application shall be evaluated on

5307its own merits in m aking a permit decision; therefore, a decision by the

5321Department to grant a permit shall not constitute a commitment to permit

5333additional similar construction with in the same fixed coastal cell."

534383. Rule 62B - 33.005(4) provides that an applicant has shown that

5355issuance of a CCCL permit is "clearly justified" by " demonstrating that all

5367standards, guidelines, and other requirements set forth in the applicable

5377provisions of part I, chapter 161, F.S., and this rule chapter are met." See also

5392§ 161.053(4), Fla. Stat.

539684. Respondent Campbell prov ed by a preponderance of the evidence that

5408the CCCL standards, guidelines, and other applicable requirements were met

5418by the permit application and the evidence adduced in the final hearing .

5431See § 16 1.053(4) and (5) , Fla. Stat.; Fla. Admin. Code R. 62B - 33.005 (2), (3),

5448(4) , (6), (9) , (11), (12), and (13) ; 62B - 33.008 and 62B - 33.0081 .

546330 YEP

546585. Generally, major structures seaward of the 30YEP are prohibited.

5475See § 161.053(5)(b) and (12)(b), Fla. Stat. However, s ection 161.053(5)(c)

5486e xplicitly provides a statutory exception for the permitting of a single - family

5500structure on a parcel if: " (1) The parcel was platted or subdivided by metes

5514and bounds before the effective date of this section; (2) The owner of the

5528parcel does not own another parcel immediately adjacent to and landward of

5540the parcel for which the dwelling is proposed; (3) The proposed single - family

5554dwelling is located landward of the frontal dune structure; and (4) The

5566proposed single - family dwelling will be as far landward on its parcel as is

5581practicable without being located sea ward of or on the frontal dune."

5593§ 161.053(5)(c)1. - 4 ., Fla. Stat.

560086. There is no dispute that the Project is a major structure, as defined in

5615r ule 62B - 33.002(55)(c)2., to be located seaward of the 30 YEP. Therefore, the

5630Project must meet the specific criteria set forth in s ection 161.053(5)(c), as

5643well as all the other criteria required to demonstrate entitlement to the

5655permit. See Fla. Admin. Cod e R. 62B - 33.005(11)( " In considering applications

5668for single - family dwellings proposed to be located seaward of the 30 - year

5683erosion projection pursuant to section 161.053(5), F.S., the Department shall

5693require structures to meet criteria in section 161.053 (5)(c), F.S., and all other

5706siting and design criteria established in this rule chapter. " ) .

571787. Rule 62B - 33.002(11) defines "dune" as "a mound, bluff or ridge of loose

5732sediment, usually sand - sized sediment, lying upland of the beach and

5744deposited by any natural or artificial mechanism, which may be bare or

5756covered with vegetation and is subject to fluctuations in configuration and

5767location."

576888. A "frontal dune" is defined as "the first natural or man - made mound or

5784bluff of sand which is located landward of the beach and which has sufficient

5798vegetation, height, continuity and configuration to offer protective value."

5807§ 161.053(5)(a)1., Fla. Stat.

581189. "Protective value" is defined as "the measurable protective level"

5821afforded by the dune system to upl and property and structures from erosion

5834and storm surge. See Fla. Admin. Code R. 62B - 33.002(44).

584590. The preponderance of the evidence demonstrates that the Project

5855satisfies the criteria in s ection 161.053(5)( c ). The P roject is a single - family

5872residentia l dwelling. The dwelling would b e located on a parcel platted well

5886before the effective date of the statute. Respondent Campbell does not own

5898the parcel immediately adjacent to and landward of the Campbell Property.

5909The Project would be located as far land ward on the parcel as is practicable

5924without being located seaward of or on the frontal dune.

593491. The preponderance of the evidence shows that the single - family

5946structure would be located at a sufficient distance landward of the beach and

5959frontal dune to p ermit natural shoreline fluctuations ; preserve and protect

5970beach and dune system stability ; and allow natural recovery to occur

5981f ollowing storm - induced erosion. See Fla. Admin. Code R. 62B - 33.005(9).

5995Impacts

599692. To obtain a permit to construct major structures seaward of the CCCL,

6009an applicant must demonstrate that adverse , and other impacts associated

6019with the construction , are minimized and the construction will not result in a

6032significant adverse impact. See Fla. Admin. Code R . 62B - 33.005(2).

604493. Adverse impacts are those that may cause a measurable interference

6055with the natural functioning of the coastal system. Significant adverse

6065impacts are adverse impacts of such magnitude that they may alter the

6077coastal system by: "(a) Measurably affecting t he existing shoreline change

6088rate, (b) Significantly interfering with its ability to recover from a coastal

6100storm, (c) Disturbing topography or vegetation such that the dune system

6111becomes unstable or suffers catastrophic failure or the protective value of the

6123dune system is significantly lowered, or" (d) cause a take [ of marine turtles. ] "

6138See Fla. Admin. Code R. 62B - 33.002(26).

614694. Respondent Campbell demonstrated that the impacts associated with

6155the Project were minimized and would not result in significa nt adverse

6167impact s .

61709 5 . A preponderance of the evidence demonstrates that any other impacts

6183associated with the Project will be offset by proposed mitigation actions.

6194See Fla. Admin. Code R . 62B - 33.005(3)(b).

62039 6 . Rule 62B - 33.005(3)(a) requires DEP to deny an application for a CCCL

6219permit that would result in a significant adverse impact "including potential

6230cumulative effects." The preponderance of the evidence demonstrates that,

6239taking into account potential cumulative effects, the P roject would not r esult

6252in a significant adverse impact.

625797 . The plain language of s ection 161.053(21) vests the Florida Building

6270Commission with the authority to adopt and administer building standards

6280for coa stal structures, while preserving DEP's authority to adopt and e nforce

6293environmental standards. Section 553.80 , Florida Statutes, also allows a

6302state agency to enforce the FBC, where authorized in the state agency's

6314enabling legislation.

631698 . Rule 62B - 33.007, which required an applicant to submit structural

6329design plans when applying for a CCCL permit, was repealed , effective

6340February 16, 2012. The criteria previously set forth in r ule 62B - 33.007 are

6355adopted by the Florida B uil ding Commission into Chapter 3109 of the FBC .

637099 . As the title suggests, FBC Chapter 3109 sets out special construction

6383standards applicable to habitable structures to be located seaward of a CCCL.

6395F BC Section 3109.1 General, states:

6401The provisions of this section shall apply to the

6410design and construction of habitable structures,

6416and substanti al improvement or repair of

6423substantial damage of such structures, that are

6430entirely seaward of, and portions of such structures

6438that extend seaward of, the coastal construction

6445control line or seaward of the 50 - foot setback line,

6456whichever is applicable. This section does not apply

6464to structures that are not habitable structures, as

6472defined in this section. Section 1612 shall apply to

6481habitable structures and structures that are not

6488habitable structures if located in whole or in part in

6498special flood haza rd areas established in Section

65061612.3.

6507100 . FBC Section 3109.1.2 Approval prior to construction, states:

6517An environmental permit from the Florida

6523Department of Environmental Protection is

6528required prior to the start of construction. When

6536issued, a copy of the environmental permit shall be

6545submitted to the building official. The

6551environmental permit may impose special siting

6557considerations to protect the beach - dune system,

6565proposed or existing structures, and public beach

6572access, and may condition the nat ure, timing and

6581sequence of construction of permitted activities to

6588provide protection to nesting sea turtles and

6595hatchlings and their habitat, including submittal

6601and approval of lighting plans.

6606101 . The specific requirements under the FBC that are relevant for DEP's

6619review for habitable structures constructed seaward of the CCCL, includ e

6630elevation certification, design and construction, foundations, piles and

6638columns, elevation standards, and walls and enclosures below the flood

6648elevation . See g enerally , Florida Building Code, Building, 7th Edition

6659(2020)( Section 3 109.3.2 (foundation); Section 3109.3.2.1 (piles); Section

66683109.3.3 (elevation standards); and Section 3109.3.4 (enclosures below flood

6677level) ) .

6680102 . A preponderance of the evidence demonstrates that Respondent

6690Campbell submitted all the required plans and surveys , signed and sealed by

6702registered professional s pursuant to r ule 62B - 33.008(1) , to meet all the

6716applicable rule requirements. See also § 161.0 53(4)(d), Fla. Stat. (The

6727department may require engineer certifications as necessary to ensure the

6737adequacy of the design and construction of permitted projects); and Fla.

6748Admin. Code R. 62B - 33.002(4) ( "Registered Professional" means a professional

6760regist ered or licensed by and in the State of Florida and practicing under

6774Chapter 471, 472, 481, or 492, F.S.)

6781Line of Construction

6784103 . The term " line of construction " is not specifically defined in

6796s tatut e or rule . No specific methodology for determining a " reasonably

6809continuous a nd uniform line of construction" is s et out in statute or rule.

6824Section 161.053(4)(b) provides: " If in the immediate contiguous or adjacent

6834area a number of existing structures have established a reasonably

6844continuous and uniform construction line closer to the line of mean high

6856water than the foregoing, and if the existing structures have not been un duly

6870affected by erosion, a proposed structure may be permitted along such line on

6883written authorization from the department if the structure is also approved

6894by the department. "

6897104. T he use of the word "if " is permissive allowing a situation to occur

6912that would not otherwise be allowed. If the line exists, it is permissive in

6926nature, not prohibitory . The undersigned may not interpret

6935section 16 1.053(4)(b) in a way that would extend or modify its express terms.

6949See Herman v. Bennett , 278 So. 3d 178, 179 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019).

6962105. The evidence adduced at hearing suggests that h istorically, the

6973purpose of determining a line of construction was to allow new owners subject

6986to CCCL restrictions to align with structures that existed prior to

6997establishment of th e CCCL. Prior case law is clear that a line of construction

7012is not a line of prohibition. See, e.g., Kelly Cadillac, Inc. v. Fla. Dep't of Envtl.

7028Prot. , Case No. 97 - 0342 , RO ¶¶ 28 and 61 (Fla. DOAH Jan. 30, 1998; Fla.

7045DEP Mar. 16 , 1998).

704910 6 . The preponderance of the evidence demonstrates that there is no

" 7062reasonably continuous and uniform line of construction " established by

7071existing structures in the immediate or adjacent areas closer to the MHWL

7083than the Campbell Property.

7087Conclusion

708810 7 . A preponderance of the evidence demonstrates that all applicable

7100standards, guidelines, and other permitting requirements are met, and

7109clearly justify the issuance of a CCCL permit for the proposed Project.

7121Attorney s ' Fees

712510 8 . Respondent Campbell seeks an award of attorney's fees against the

7138Hanson Petitioners and the Co - Petitioners under section 120.595, which

7149requires a finding of "improper purpose" by the undersigned in this

7160Recommended Orde r.

716310 9 . The Hanson Petitioners in Case No. 20 - 3788 took a voluntary

7178dismissal and were severed from the instant consolidated proceeding.

7187See Town of Davie v. Santana, 98 So. 3d 262 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012)(holding that

7202administrative law judge lacked jurisdiction to reopen case to impose

7212attorneys' fees under section 120.595(1), when they closed the case once the

7224petition was dismissed and no motion for attorneys' fees was pending).

72351 10 . Section 120.595(1)(c) requires that:

7242In making such determination, the administrative

7248law judge shall consider whether the nonprevailing

7255adverse party has participated in two or more other

7264such proceedings involving the same prevailing

7270party and the same project as an adverse party and

7280in which such two or more proceedings the

7288nonprevailing adverse party did not establish

7294either the factual or legal merits of its position, and

7304shall consider whether the factual or legal position

7312asserted in the instant proceeding would have been

7320cognizable in the previous proceedings. In such

7327event, it shall be rebuttably presumed that the

7335nonprevailing adverse party participated in the

7341pending proceeding for an improper purpose.

73471 1 1 . "Improper purpose" means participation in a proceeding primarily to

7360harass or to cause unnecessary delay or for frivolous purpose or to needlessly

7373increase t he cost of litigation, licensing, or securing the approval of an

7386activity. See § 120.595(1)(e), Fla. Stat.

739211 2 . The actions of the Co - Petitioners in this proceeding do not meet the

7409considerations of sections 120.595(1)(c) and (e) that would justify a finding of

"7421improper purpose" for purposes of an award of attorney s ' fees and costs.

7435R ECOMMENDATION

7437Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is

7450hereby ,

7451R ECOMMENDED that DEP enter a Final Order granting Respondent

7461Campbell ' s app lication for a CCCL Permit to construct a single - family

7476residence and associated structures seaward of the CCCL on Anna Maria

7487Island in Manatee County, Florida.

7492D ONE A ND E NTERED this 7th day of June , 2021, in Tallahassee, Leon

7507County, Florida.

7509S

7510F RANCINE M. F FOLKES

7515Administrative Law Judge

75181230 Apalachee Parkway

7521Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3060

7526(850) 488 - 9675

7530www.doah.state.fl.us

7531Filed with the Clerk of the

7537Division of Administrative Hearings

7541this 7th day of June , 2021.

7547C OPIES F URNISHED :

7552Kelley F. Corbari, Esquire Richard Green, Esquire

7559Alexis Montiglio, Esquire Lewis, Longman & Walker, P.A.

7567Department of Environmental Protection 100 Second Avenue South , Suite 501 - S

75793900 Commonwealth Boulevard , M ail Stop 35 St. Petersburg, Florida 33701

7590Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3000

7595Kevin S. Hennessy, Esquire

7599Noah Valenstein, Secretary Lewis, Longman & Walker, P.A.

7607Department of Environmental Protection 101 Riverfront Boulevard , Suite 620

7616Douglas Building Bradenton, Florida 34205

76213900 Commonwealth Boulevard

7624Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3000 Jason M. Miller, Esquire

7633Matthew Clark, Esquire

7636Lea Crandall, Agency Clerk Najmy Thompson, P.L.

7643Department of Environmental Protection 1401 Eighth Avenue West

7651Douglas Building, Mail Station 35 Bradenton, Florida 34205

76593900 Commonwealth Boulevard

7662Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3000 David Mark Levin, Esquire

7671Icard, Merrill, Cullis, Timm, Furen

7676Justin G. Wolfe, General Counsel & Ginsburg, P.A.

7684Department of Environmental Protection 2033 Main Street , Suite 600

7693Legal Department, Suite 1051 - J Sarasota, Florida 34237

7702Douglas Building, Mail Station 35

77073900 Commonwealth Boulevard

7710Tallahassee, Florida 32399 - 3000

7715N OTICE OF R IGHT T O S UBMIT E XCEPTIONS

7726All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within 15 days from

7739the date of this Recommended Order. Any exceptions to this Recommended

7750Order should be filed with the agency that will issue the Final Order in this

7765case.

Select the PDF icon to view the document.
PDF
Date
Proceedings
PDF:
Date: 07/20/2021
Proceedings: Agency Final Order
PDF:
Date: 07/20/2021
Proceedings: Respondents' Joint Response to Petitioners' Exceptions to the Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 07/20/2021
Proceedings: Petitioner's Exceptions to the Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 07/20/2021
Proceedings: Agency Final Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 07/13/2021
Proceedings: Undeliverable envelope returned from the Post Office.
PDF:
Date: 06/07/2021
Proceedings: Recommended Order
PDF:
Date: 06/07/2021
Proceedings: Recommended Order cover letter identifying the hearing record referred to the Agency.
PDF:
Date: 06/07/2021
Proceedings: Recommended Order (hearing held February 8 through 10, 12, 15, 16, and 18, 2021). CASE CLOSED.
PDF:
Date: 05/25/2021
Proceedings: Order Denying Respondents' Joint Motion to Strike Portions of Petitioners' Proposed Recommended Order.
PDF:
Date: 05/21/2021
Proceedings: Petitioners' Response to Respondents' Joint Motion to Strike Portions of Petitioners' Proposed Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/20/2021
Proceedings: Joint Motion of the Respondents to Strike Portions of Petitioners' Proposed Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/17/2021
Proceedings: Notice of Filing Proposed Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/17/2021
Proceedings: Petitioners' Proposed Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/17/2021
Proceedings: Respondent's Proposed Recommended Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/05/2021
Proceedings: Order Granting Extension of Time.
PDF:
Date: 05/05/2021
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Motion to for Extension of Time to File Proposed Recommended Orders filed.
PDF:
Date: 05/05/2021
Proceedings: Order on Pending Motion.
PDF:
Date: 04/30/2021
Proceedings: Notice of Non-Objection to Dismissal (filed in Case No. 20-003788).
PDF:
Date: 04/26/2021
Proceedings: Notice of Filing Transcript.
Date: 04/26/2021
Proceedings: Transcript of Proceedings (not available for viewing) filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/20/2021
Proceedings: Petitioners David Morris, Ling Liu, Dar Real Estate Enterprises, LLC, and Richard J. Theidel's Response to Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Motion to Relinquish Jurisdiction and Strike Evidence and Testimony filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/19/2021
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Motion to Relinquish Jurisdiction to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection and to Strike Evidence and Testimony submitted on behalf of Petitioners, Graham and Hazel Hanson filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/19/2021
Proceedings: Order Denying Motion For Post-Hearing Status Conference.
PDF:
Date: 04/07/2021
Proceedings: Petitioners David Morris, Ling Liu, Dar Real Estate Enterprises, LLC, and Richard J. Theidel's Response to Florida Department of Envionmental Protection's Motion Requesting Post-Hearing Status Conference filed.
PDF:
Date: 04/06/2021
Proceedings: Florida Department of Envionmental Protection's, Motion Requesting Post-Hearing Status Conference filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/10/2021
Proceedings: Petitioners Hanson's Memorandum in Opposition to Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Motion to Strike Witness Testimony of Michael Walther, P.E. filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/05/2021
Proceedings: Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Request for Ruling on Deposition Objections filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/05/2021
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Notice of Designations of Objections to Deposition of Rolando Gomez filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/04/2021
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Motion to Strike Witness Testimony of Michael Walther, P.E. filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/01/2021
Proceedings: Motion to Admit the Deposition Transcript of Rolondo Gomez into Evidence filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/01/2021
Proceedings: Hanson Petitioners Amended Notice of Filing Deposition Transcript and Exhibits filed.
PDF:
Date: 03/01/2021
Proceedings: Hanson Petitioners Notice of Filing Deposition Transcript and Exhibits filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/18/2021
Proceedings: Notice of Appearance as Co-Counsel (Michelle Grantham; filed in Case No. 20-003788).
Date: 02/15/2021
Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
PDF:
Date: 02/15/2021
Proceedings: Petitioners Hanson's Memorandum of Law in Support of Proposed Witnesses Gunnar Barcomb, Brent Whitehead, and Rolando Gomez filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/15/2021
Proceedings: Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Memorandum of Law in Support of Its Ore Tenus Motion to Quash Subpoenas and Request for Protective Order as to Agency Witnesses filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/15/2021
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Motion for Protective Order, Motion to Quash and Renewed Motion for Attorneys' Fees filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/15/2021
Proceedings: Notice of Hearing by Zoom Conference (hearing set for February 15, 16 and 18, 2021; 9:00 a.m., Eastern Time).
PDF:
Date: 02/11/2021
Proceedings: Order Granting Petitioners David Morris, Ling Liu, DAR RealEstate Enterprises, LLC, and Richard J. Theidel's Request for Official Recognition.
PDF:
Date: 02/09/2021
Proceedings: Co-Petitioners' Notice of Service of Supplemental Hearing Exhibits filed.
Date: 02/09/2021
Proceedings: Petitioner's Proposed Exhibits filed (exhibits not available for viewing).
Date: 02/08/2021
Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Hearing Partially Held; continued to February 15, 2021; 9:00 a.m.; Tallahassee, FL.
PDF:
Date: 02/08/2021
Proceedings: Respondents' Joint Opposition to Petitioner's Motion for Judicial Notice filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/08/2021
Proceedings: Petitioners David Morris, Ling Liu, DAR RealEstate Enterprises, LLC, and Richard J. Theidel's Request for Official Recognition filed.
Date: 02/05/2021
Proceedings: Respondent's Proposed Exhibits filed (exhibits not available for viewing).
PDF:
Date: 02/05/2021
Proceedings: Petitioners Hanson's Memorandum in Opposition to Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Motion to Strike Witness Testimony of Co-Petitioners' Identified Witnesses, Leo Mills, Kent Shore, and "All Witnesses or Persons Listed in Discovery" (filed in Case No. 20-003788).
PDF:
Date: 02/05/2021
Proceedings: Petitioners Hanson's Memorandum in Opposition to Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Motion to Strike Witness Testimony of Co-Petitioners' Identified Witnesses, Leo Mills, Kent Shore, and "All Witnesses or Persons Listed in Discovery" filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/05/2021
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Second Amended Notice of Filing Final Hearing Exhibit List and Certificate of Service of Exhibits filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/03/2021
Proceedings: Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Notice of Reservation of Objections to Co-Petitioners' Exhibits filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/03/2021
Proceedings: Co-Petitioners' Notice of Service of Hearing Exhibits filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/03/2021
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Notice of Reservation of Objections to Petitioners' Exhibits as not Presented at the January 27, 2021 Attorney Conference filed.
Date: 02/03/2021
Proceedings: Respondent's and Joint Proposed Exhibits filed (exhibits not available for viewing).
PDF:
Date: 02/03/2021
Proceedings: Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Notice of Service of Hearing Exhibits filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/03/2021
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Motion to Strike Witness Testimony of Co-Petitioners' Identified Witnesses, Leo Mills, Kent Shore, and All Witnesses or Persons Listed in Discovery filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/03/2021
Proceedings: Co-Petitioners Second Amended Joint Prehearing Stipulation filed.
Date: 02/02/2021
Proceedings: Respondent's Proposed Exhibits filed (exhibits not available for viewing).
PDF:
Date: 02/02/2021
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Amended Notice of Filing Final Hearing Exhibit List and Certificate of Service of Exhibits filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/02/2021
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Notice of Filing Final Hearing Exhibit List and Certificate of Service of Exhibits filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/01/2021
Proceedings: Notice of Service (of Co-Petitioners Amended Joint Prehearing Stipulation) filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/01/2021
Proceedings: Co-Petitioners Amended Joint Prehearing Stipulation filed.
PDF:
Date: 02/01/2021
Proceedings: Second Amended Notice of Continuation of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum of Michael Walther, P.E. filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/29/2021
Proceedings: Co-Petitioners Joint Prehearing Statement filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/29/2021
Proceedings: Joint Prehearing Stipulation filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/29/2021
Proceedings: Order Denying Petitioners Hanson's Motion To Compel, To Supplement And In Reconsideration Of Its Memorandum Of Law In Support Of Its Amended And Restated Motion For Continuance.
PDF:
Date: 01/29/2021
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Response in Opposition to Hansons' Renewed Motion for Continuance filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/29/2021
Proceedings: Amended Notice of Continuation of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum of Michael Walther, P.E. filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/29/2021
Proceedings: Petitioners Hanson's Motion to Compel, to Supplement and in Reconsideration of its Memorandum of Law in Support of its Amended and Restated Motion for Continuance filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/29/2021
Proceedings: Notice of Continuation of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum of Michael Walther, P.E. filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/28/2021
Proceedings: Order Denying Motion to Strike Witness Testimony.
PDF:
Date: 01/27/2021
Proceedings: Order Denying Emergency Motion for Reconsideration.
PDF:
Date: 01/27/2021
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Response in Opposition to Hansons' Emergency Motion for Reconsideration on the Issue regarding Respondent's Motion to Strike filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/25/2021
Proceedings: Notice of Serving Petitioner, Graham Hanson's Third Amended Answers to Fedora Campbell's First Set of Interrogatories to Petitioners, Graham and Hazel Hanson filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/25/2021
Proceedings: Petitioners, Graham and Hazel Hanson's Supplemental Responses to their Responses filed January 22, 2021 the Florida Department of Environmental Protection's First Set of Requests for Production of Documents to Petitioners filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/25/2021
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Petitioner, David Morris and Ling Liu Answers to Respondent, Florida Department of Environmental Protection's First Set of Interrogatories filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/25/2021
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Petitioner, Richard J. Theidel's Answers to Respondent, Florida Department of Environmental Protection's First Set of Interrogatories filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/25/2021
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Petitioner, Dar Real Estate Enterprises, LLC's Answers to Responden, Florida Department of Environmental Protection's First Set of Interrogatories filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/25/2021
Proceedings: Petitioner Morris, Ling Liu, DAR Real Estate Enterprises, LLC, and Theidel Response to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection's First Set of Request for Production of Documents to Petitioners filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/25/2021
Proceedings: Florida Department of Environmental Protection's, Emergency Motion to Compel Answers to Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents (Morris DAR Theidel) filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/25/2021
Proceedings: Petitioners, Graham and Hazel Hanson's Responses to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection's First Set of Request for Production of Documents to Petitioners filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/25/2021
Proceedings: Notice of Serving Petitioner, Graham Hanson's Answers to the Florida Department of Environmental Protection's First Set of Interrogatories to Petitioners, Graham and Hazel Hanson filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/25/2021
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Motion to Strike Witness Testimony of Michael Walther, P.E. filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/25/2021
Proceedings: Petitioners Hanson's Emergency Motion for Reconsideration on the Issue Regarding Respondent Fedora Campbell's Motion to Strike and Incorporated Memorandum of Law filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/22/2021
Proceedings: Order Denying Continuance of Final Hearing.
Date: 01/21/2021
Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Motion Hearing Held.
PDF:
Date: 01/20/2021
Proceedings: Respondents' Joint Opposition to Hanson Petitioners' Amended and Restated Motion for Continuance filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/19/2021
Proceedings: Notice of Zoom Teleconference (motion hearing set for January 21, 2021; 9:00 a.m., Eastern Time).
PDF:
Date: 01/19/2021
Proceedings: Petitioners Hanson's Memorandum of Law in Opposition to Respondent Fedora Campbell's Motion to Strike filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/19/2021
Proceedings: Petitioners Hanson's Memorandum of Law in Support of Its Amended and Restated Motion for Continuance filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/15/2021
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Motion to Strike filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/14/2021
Proceedings: Petitioner's Amended and Restated Motion for Continuance filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/13/2021
Proceedings: Motion for Continuance filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/12/2021
Proceedings: Amended Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum (Campbell) filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/11/2021
Proceedings: Second Amended Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum of Stephen Hanson filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/08/2021
Proceedings: Order Denying Respondent's Renewed Emergency Motion For Protective Order .
PDF:
Date: 01/08/2021
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Renewed Emergency Motion for Protective Order regarding Deposition of Tony McNeal filedr
PDF:
Date: 01/08/2021
Proceedings: Amended Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum of Stephen Hanson filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/06/2021
Proceedings: Petitioners', Graham Hanson and Hazel Hanson, Witness Disclosure filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/04/2021
Proceedings: The Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Cross-Notice of Deposition filed.
PDF:
Date: 01/04/2021
Proceedings: The Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Cross-Notice of Deposition Duces Tecum (of Michael Walther) filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/29/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Cancellation of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/29/2020
Proceedings: Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Witness Disclosure filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/23/2020
Proceedings: Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Notice of Service of First Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 1-16) and Requests for Production of Documents to (Nos. 1-7) to Petitioners, Graham and Hazel Hanson filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/23/2020
Proceedings: Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Notice of Service of First Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 1-16) and Requests for Production of Documents to (Nos. 1-7) to Petitioner, Richard J. Theidel filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/23/2020
Proceedings: FLorida Department of Environmental Protection's Notice of Service of First Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 1-16) and Requests for Production of Documents to (Nos. 1-7) to Petitioner, DAR Real Estate Enterprises, LLC filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/23/2020
Proceedings: Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Notice of Service of First Set of Interrogatories (Nos. 1-16) and Requests for Production of Documents to (Nos. 1-7) to Petitioners, David Morris and Ling Liu filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/23/2020
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Witness List filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/23/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum of Stephen Hanson filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/22/2020
Proceedings: Amended Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum (McNeal) filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/22/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum (Manausa) filed. b
PDF:
Date: 12/22/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum (Hoffner) filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/22/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum (Hyatt) filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/22/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum (Aarons) filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/22/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum (Campbell) filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/22/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum (Gomez) filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/22/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum (Damon) filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/22/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum (Goddard) filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/22/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum filed. (DUPLICATE)
PDF:
Date: 12/22/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum (Moore) filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/18/2020
Proceedings: Petitioners, David Morris and Ling Liu's Response to Respondent, Fedora Campbell's Second Request for Production of Documents filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/18/2020
Proceedings: Petitioner, Richard J. Theidel's Response to Respondent, Fedora Campbell's Second Request for Production of Documents filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/18/2020
Proceedings: Petitioner, DAR Real Estate Enterprises, LLC's Response to Respondent, Fedora Campbell's Second Request for Production of Documents filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/18/2020
Proceedings: Order on Emergency Motion for Protective Order.
PDF:
Date: 12/18/2020
Proceedings: Petitioners' Supplemental Response in Opposition to Respondent Fedora Campbell's Emergency Motion for Protective Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/18/2020
Proceedings: Petitioners' Response in Opposition to Respondent Fedora Campbell's Emergency Motion for Protective Order (filed in Case No. 20-003788).
PDF:
Date: 12/18/2020
Proceedings: Petitioners' Response in Opposition to Respondent Fedora Campbell's Emergency Motion for Protective Order filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/17/2020
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Emergency Motion for Protective Order regarding Deposition of Tony McNeal filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/16/2020
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Motion for Protective Order regarding Deposition of Tony McNeal filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/15/2020
Proceedings: The Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Cross-Notice of Deposition Duces Tecum (of Tony McNeal, PE) filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/14/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Filing (Return of Service) filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/08/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum of Michael Walther, P.E. filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/03/2020
Proceedings: Second Restated Notice of Appearance filed. (Duplicate)
PDF:
Date: 12/03/2020
Proceedings: Second Restated Notice of Appearance filed.
PDF:
Date: 12/02/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition Duces Tecum (McNeal) filed.
PDF:
Date: 11/30/2020
Proceedings: Petitioners, Graham Hanson and Hazel Hansons' Amended Response to Respondent, Fedora Campbell's First Request for Production (filed in Case No. 20-003788).
PDF:
Date: 11/30/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Serving Petitioner, Hazel Hanson's Second Amended Answers to Respondent, Fedora Campbell's First Interrogatories (filed in Case No. 20-003788).
PDF:
Date: 11/25/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Serving Petitioner, Graham Hanson's Second Amended Answers to repondent, Fedora Campbell's First Interrogatories (filed in Case No. 20-003788).
PDF:
Date: 11/18/2020
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora Campbell Second Request for Production of Documents to Petitioner, DAR Real Estate Enterprises, LLC filed.
PDF:
Date: 11/18/2020
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora Campbell's Second Request for Production of Documents to Petitioner, Richard J. Theidel filed.
PDF:
Date: 11/18/2020
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora Campbell Second Request for Production of Documents to Petitioners, David Morris and Ling Liu filed.
PDF:
Date: 11/16/2020
Proceedings: Order Granting Amended Motion to Compel.
PDF:
Date: 10/30/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition of Graham Hanson filed.
PDF:
Date: 10/30/2020
Proceedings: Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Notice of Service of Responses to Petitioner, Richard J. Theidel's, Interrogatories (Nos. 1-28) filed.
PDF:
Date: 10/23/2020
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Amended Motion to Compel Better Answers to Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents and Compel Production of a Privilege Log (with Composite Exhibits A & B) filed.
PDF:
Date: 10/23/2020
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Motion to Compel Better Answers to Interrogatories and Requests for Production of Documents and Compel Production of a Privilege Log filed.
PDF:
Date: 10/21/2020
Proceedings: FDEP Notice of Service of Response to Theidel Interrogatories filed.
PDF:
Date: 10/21/2020
Proceedings: Florida Department of Envionmental Protection's Notice of Service of Responses to Petitioner, Richard J. Theidel's, Interrogatories filed.
PDF:
Date: 10/20/2020
Proceedings: Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Notice of Service of Responses to Petitioner, Dar Real Estate Enterprises, LLC's, Requests for Admissions (Nos. 1-30) filed.
PDF:
Date: 10/20/2020
Proceedings: Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Notice of Service of Responses to Petitioner, David Morris's, Requests for Admissions (Nos. 1-24) filed.
PDF:
Date: 10/16/2020
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's Notice of Serving Answers to Petitioner, David Morris' First Set of Interrogatories to Respondent filed.
PDF:
Date: 10/16/2020
Proceedings: The Florida Department of Environmental Protection's Cross-Notice of Depositions filed.
PDF:
Date: 10/09/2020
Proceedings: Petitioners, Graham Hanson and Hazel Hansons' Response to Respondent, Fedora Campbell's First Request for Production (filed in Case No. 20-003788).
PDF:
Date: 10/09/2020
Proceedings: Petitioner, Hazel Hanson's Response to Respondent, Fedora Campbell's Request for Admissions (filed in Case No. 20-003788).
PDF:
Date: 10/09/2020
Proceedings: Petitioner, Graham Hanson's Response to Respondent, Fedora Campbell's Request for Admissions (filed in Case No. 20-003788).
PDF:
Date: 10/09/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Serving Petitioner, Hazel Hanson's Answers to Respondent, Fedora Campbell's First Interrogatories (filed in Case No. 20-003788).
PDF:
Date: 10/09/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Serving Petitioner, Graham Hanson's Answers to Respondent, Fedora Campbell's First Interrogatories (filed in Case No. 20-003788).
PDF:
Date: 10/07/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition of Richard J. Theidel filed.
PDF:
Date: 10/07/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Corporate Representative Deposition of DAR Real Estate Enterprises, LLC Pursuant to Rule 1.301(b)(6), Florida Rules of Civil Procedure filed.
PDF:
Date: 10/07/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition of Ling Liu filed.
PDF:
Date: 10/07/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Taking Deposition of David Morris filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/24/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Petitioner, DAR Real Estate Enterprises, LLC's Answers to Respondent, Fedora Campbell's First Set of Interrogatories filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/24/2020
Proceedings: Petitioner, David Morris and Ling Liu's Response to Respondent, Fedora Campbell's First Request for Production of Documents filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/24/2020
Proceedings: Petitioner, Richard J. Theidel's Response to Respondent, Fedora Campbell's First Request for Production of Documents filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/24/2020
Proceedings: Petitioner, DAR Real Estate Enterprises, LLC's Response to Respondent, Fedora Campbell's First Request for Production of Documents filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/24/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Petitioner, David Morris' Answers to Respondent, Fedora Campbell's First Set of Interrogatories filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/24/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Petitioner, Ling Liu's Answers to Respondent, Fedora Campbell's First Set of Interrogatories filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/24/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Petitioner, Richard J. Theidel's Answers to Respondent, Fedora Campbell's First Set of Interrogatories filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/24/2020
Proceedings: Order Granting Extension of Time.
PDF:
Date: 09/24/2020
Proceedings: Petitioners, Graham Hanson's and Hazel Hanson's Motion for Extension of Time to Respond to Respondent Campbell's Discovery (filed in Case No. 20-003788).
PDF:
Date: 09/18/2020
Proceedings: Petitioner, Ling Liu's Response to Respondent, Fedora Campbell's First Request for Admissions filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/18/2020
Proceedings: Petitioner, David Morris' Response to Respondent, Fedora Campbell's First Request for Admissions filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/18/2020
Proceedings: Petitioner, Richard J. Theidel's Response to Respodent, Fedora Campbell's First Request for Admissions filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/18/2020
Proceedings: Petitioner, DAR Real Estate Enterprises, LLC's Response to Respondent, Fedora Campbell's First Request for Admissions filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/16/2020
Proceedings: Order Granting Continuance and Rescheduling Hearing by Zoom Conference (hearing set for February 8 through 10 and February 12, 2021; 9:00 a.m.; Tallahassee).
Date: 09/15/2020
Proceedings: CASE STATUS: Motion Hearing Held.
PDF:
Date: 09/15/2020
Proceedings: Petitioner, David Morris' First Request for Admissions to Florida Department of Environmental Protection filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/15/2020
Proceedings: Petitioner, DAR Real Estate Enterprises, LLC's First Request for Admissions to Florida Department of Environmental Protection filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/14/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Petitioner, Richard J. Theidel's First Set of Interrogatories to Respondent, Florida Department of Environmental Protection filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/14/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Petitioner, David Morris' First Set of Interrogatories to Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/11/2020
Proceedings: Motion and Memorandum of Law Adopting Petitioners' Morris and Lius' Motion for Continance filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/10/2020
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora L. Campbell's, Response to Motion for Continuance filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/04/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Motion Hearing by Zoom (Motion hearing set for September 15, 2020; 4:00 p.m.; Tallahassee).
PDF:
Date: 09/03/2020
Proceedings: Motion for Continuance filed.
PDF:
Date: 09/01/2020
Proceedings: Order of Pre-hearing Instructions.
PDF:
Date: 09/01/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Hearing by Zoom Conference (hearing set for November 16 through 20, 2020; 9:30 a.m.; Tallahassee).
PDF:
Date: 09/01/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Substitution of Counsel (Matthew Clark; filed in Case No. 20-003788).
PDF:
Date: 08/31/2020
Proceedings: Order of Consolidation (DOAH Case Nos. 20-3759, 20-3760, 20-3786, 20-3788)
PDF:
Date: 08/31/2020
Proceedings: Joint Response to Initial Orders filed.
PDF:
Date: 08/25/2020
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora Campbell First Requests for Production of Documents to Petitioner, DAR Real Estate Enterprises, LLC filed.
PDF:
Date: 08/25/2020
Proceedings: Respondent, Fedora Campbell's First Request for Admissions to Petitioner, DAR Real Estate Enterprises, LLC filed.
PDF:
Date: 08/25/2020
Proceedings: Notice of Service of Respondent, Fedora Campbell's First Set of Interrogatories to Petitioner, DAR Real Estate Enterprises, LLC filed.
PDF:
Date: 08/24/2020
Proceedings: Initial Order.
PDF:
Date: 08/19/2020
Proceedings: Agency action letter filed.
PDF:
Date: 08/19/2020
Proceedings: Petition for Formal Administrative Hearing filed.
PDF:
Date: 08/19/2020
Proceedings: Request for Assignment of Administrative Law Judge and Notice of Preservation of Record filed.

Case Information

Judge:
FRANCINE M. FFOLKES
Date Filed:
08/19/2020
Date Assignment:
08/24/2020
Last Docket Entry:
07/20/2021
Location:
Tallahassee, Florida
District:
Northern
Agency:
ADOPTED IN PART OR MODIFIED
 

Counsels

Related Florida Statute(s) (6):