95-003334RX Parrish Management, Inc. vs. Human Relations Commission Status: Closed DOAH Final Order on Friday, October 13, 1995.

Summary: Statute does not authorize delegation to executeive director of authority to determine reasonable cause, and is invalid exercise of authority by comm.

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

PARRISH MANAGEMENT, INC., )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 95-3334RX

)

FLORIDA COMMISSION ON HUMAN )

RELATIONS, )

)

Respondent. )

_____________________________)

FINAL ORDER

Following notice to all parties, Don W. Davis, a Hearing Officer for the

Division of Administrative Hearings, held a final hearing in the above-styled

case on August 7, 1995, in Tallahassee, Florida.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: W. Douglas Moody, Jr., Esquire

Bateman Graham

300 East Park Avenue

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

For Respondent: Dana Baird, Esquire

325 John Knox Road, Suite 240

Tallahassee, Florida 32303-4149

and

Gregory A. Chaires, Esquire

Allen R. Grossman, Esquire

Assistant Attorneys General

Office of the Attorney General

PL-01, The Capitol

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1050

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

The issue is whether Rule 60Y-2.004(2)(e) and Rule 60Y-5.004, Florida

Administrative Code, delegating to the Executive Director of the Florida Human

Relations Commission the authority to make reasonable cause determinations

pursuant to Section 760.11(3), Florida Statutes, constitute an invalid exercise

of delegated legislative authority?

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

This matter began on June 30, 1995, when Petitioner, Parrish Management,

Inc., filed its petition seeking an administrative determination pursuant to

Section 120.56, Florida Statutes, of the validity of Rule 60Y-2.004(2)(e) and

Rule 60Y-5.004, Florida Administrative Code.

On July 24, 1995, counsel for Respondent filed a Motion For Summary Final

Order pursuant to Rule 60Q-2.030, Florida Administrative Code. Argument was

heard August 7, 1995, and the motion was denied.

At the final hearing, Respondent presented three (3) exhibits and testimony

of two (2) witnesses. Petitioner presented no testimony or exhibits in

accordance with the agreement of the parties that the asserted standing of

Petitioner to bring this action was uncontested.

The transcript of the final hearing was filed with the Division of

Administrative Hearings on September 7, 1995. The parties requested and were

granted leave to file proposed final orders on September 22, 1995. The proposed

findings of fact submitted by the parties are addressed in the appendix to this

final order.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Respondent is the Florida Human Relations Commission (Commission)

created by Chapter 760, Florida Statutes, and is an agency within the meaning of

Section 20.03(11), Florida Statutes (1993). The Commission consists of twelve

(12) members appointed by the Governor. The Commission is charged with the

administration of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992.

2. Petitioner is Parrish Management, Inc. Petitioner is an "employer"

within the meaning of Section 760.02(7), Florida Statutes, and, in accordance

with stipulation of the parties, has standing to bring this proceeding.

Evidence in this record of Petitioner's involvement as a participating party in

another administrative proceeding convened pursuant to provisions of Section

120.57, Florida Statutes, as the result of a determination of reasonable cause,

further serves to underscore Petitioner's qualification as a substantially

affected party for purposes of this proceeding.

3. Respondent enacted Rule 60Y-2.004(2)(e) and Rule 60Y-5.004, Florida

Administrative Code, ostensibly pursuant to authority contained in Subsections

760.06(6) and (12), Florida Statutes. Those statutory provisions read as

follows:

Powers of the commission.--Within the

limitations provided by law, the commission

shall have the following powers:

* * *

(6) To issue subpoenas for, administer oaths

or affirmations to and compel the attendance

and testimony of witnesses or to issue subpoenas

for and compel the production of books, papers,

records, documents and other evidence pertaining

to any investigation or hearing convened pursuant

to the powers of the commission. In conducting

an investigation, the commission and its inves-

tigators shall have access at all reasonable

times to premises, records, documents, and other

evidence or possible sources of evidence and may

examine, record, and copy such materials and take

and record the testimony or statements of such

persons as are reasonably necessary for the

furtherance of the investigation. The authority

to issue subpoenas and administer oaths may be

delegated by the commission, for investigations

or hearings, to a commissioner or the executive

director. In the case of a refusal to obey a

subpoena issued to any person, the commission may

make application to any circuit court in this

state, which shall have jurisdiction to order

the witness to appear before the commission to

give testimony and to produce evidence concerning

the matter in question. Failure to obey the

court's order may be punished by the court as

contempt. If the court enters an order holding

a person in contempt or compelling the person to

comply with the commission's order or subpoena,

the court shall order the person to pay the

commission reasonable expenses, including

reasonable attorneys' fees, accrued by the

commission in obtaining the order from the court.

* * *

(12) To adopt, promulgate, amend, and rescind

rules to effectuate the purposes and policies

of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992 and

govern the proceedings of the commission in

accordance with chapter 120. (emphasis supplied.)

4. Rule 60Y-2.004(2)(e) and Rule 60Y-5.004, Florida Administrative Code,

read as follows:

60Y-2.004 General Description of Organization

and Functions of Commission Staff.

(2) The Executive Director is the chief

administrative officer of the Commission and

is responsible for implementing policy of the

Commission. The Executive Director is appointed

by the Commission and may be removed by the

Commission for cause. The Executive Director

has the following duties:

(e) make determinations as provided by Rule 60Y-5.004;

* * *

60Y-5.004 Executive Director's Investigatory

Determination; Notice.

(1) Upon completion of an investigation, if a

complaint has not been settled or withdrawn, the

Office of Employment Investigations shall report

the investigation, with recommendation, to the

Office of General Counsel. The Office of General

Counsel shall review the report and shall make a

recommendation to the Executive Director as to

whether there is reasonable cause to believe that

an unlawful employment practice has occurred.

(2) If the recommendation is based upon lack

of jurisdiction over the respondent or subject

matter of the complaint or upon untimely filing

of the complaint, the Executive Director may

dismiss the complaint pursuant to Subsection 60Y-

5.006(3) or (11), provided that the investigation

does not reveal any disputed issues of material

fact. The Executive Director shall issue a

determination on the foregoing bases of lack of

jurisdiction or untimeliness where disputed

issues of material fact appear to exist.

(3) After a determination has been made by

the Executive Director, the Clerk shall serve a

Notice of Determination, with copies of the

determination, upon the complainant and the

respondent.

(4) A Notice of Determination of Reasonable

Cause shall include an invitation to participate

in conciliation.

(5) A Notice of Determination of No Reasonable

Cause, No Jurisdiction or Untimeliness shall

advise the complainant of the right to file a

Petition for Relief, pursuant to Rule 60Y-5.008,

within 30 days of service of the notice. A form,

Petition for Relief, hereby incorporated by

reference, in blank, shall be provided to the

complainant at the time of service of the notice.

(6) A Notice of Determination shall further

advise the parties of the right to request

redetermination, pursuant to Rule 6OY-5.007,

within 20 days of service of the notice. If

the complainant requests redetermination, the

30-day period for filing a Petition for Relief

shall be tolled until service of a Notice of

Redetermination.

(7) After service of a Notice of Determination,

the parties named in the determination may inspect

the records and documents, in the custody of the

Commission, which pertain to the determination.

The Executive Director may direct that a particular

record, document or portion thereof be withheld

from inspection by a party only when necessary for

the protection of a witness or third party, or for

the preservation of a trade secret.

5. Helpful to an understanding of the legal authority of the Commission

and consideration of whether the subject rules are an appropriate result of

legislatively delegated authority, is Section 760.11(4), Florida Statues, which

provides that:

In the event that the Commission determines that

there is reasonable cause to believe that a

discriminatory practice has occurred in violation

of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992, the

aggrieved person may either:

(a) Bring a civil action against the person

named in the complaint in any court of competent

jurisdiction; or

(b) Request an administrative hearing under s.

120.57.

The election by the aggrieved person of filing

civil action or requesting an administrative

hearing under this subsection is the exclusive

procedure available to the aggrieved person

pursuant to this act. (emphasis supplied.)

6. Further, Section 760.11(3), Florida Statutes, provides in pertinent

part that, "Within 180 days of the filing of the complaint, the Commission shall

determine if there is reasonable cause to believe that discriminatory practice

has occurred in violation of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992." (emphasis

supplied.)

7. As noted, Section 760.11(4), Florida Statues, provides two separate

avenues of relief, one administrative and one judicial. Additionally, as set

forth in Section 760.11(5), Florida Statutes, the judicial remedy permits the

recovery of back pay, and allows damages for mental anguish, loss of dignity,

any other intangible injuries, and punitive damages.

8. The Commission's determination of reasonable cause pursuant to Section

760.11(4), Florida Statutes, is a condition or restriction upon the exercise by

a complainant of a substantive right, i.e. the right to judicial remedy.

Accordingly, provisions of Section 760.11(4), Florida Statutes, which authorize

the Commission's determination constitute a substantive, as opposed to a

procedural, law.

9. In those instances of the Commission's determination of no reasonable

cause, Section 760.11(7), Florida Statutes, provides:

If the Commission determines that there is not

reasonable cause to believe that a violation

of the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992 has

occurred, the commission shall dismiss the

complaint. The aggrieved person may request

an administrative hearing under s.120.57, but

any such request must be made within 35 days

of the date of determination of reasonable

cause any such hearing shall be heard by a

hearing officer and not by the commission or

a commissioner. If the aggrieved person does

not request an administrative hearing within

the 35 days, the claim will be barred. . . .

10. As established by evidence presented at the final hearing, members of

the Commission meet formally on a quarterly basis throughout the year to

consider policy issues but have no formal knowledge or involvement in any

pending case prior to presentment of recommended orders rendered by Hearing

Officers of the Division of Administrative Hearings.

11. As established through official recognition of provisions of Section

760.11, Florida Statutes, the Commission is an adjudicative body with the quasi-

judicial authority to determine the substantive rights of the parties, award

back pay, prohibit specified discriminatory employment practices and provide

affirmative relief from the effects of those practices.

CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

12. The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over this

matter. Section 120.56, Florida Statutes.

13. In accordance with provisions of Section 120.56, Florida Statutes,

Petitioner has standing, as a substantially affected person, to bring this

proceeding.

14. As noted in Section 760.06(6), Florida Statutes, the Commission may

delegate the authority to "issue subpoenas and administer oaths" to either "a

commissioner or the Executive Director" for investigations or hearings. The

plain meaning of the statute is clear. The Commission's delegation authority in

this regard is limited solely to issuance of subpoenas and administration of

oaths and is not reasonably susceptible to another definition, i.e, authority to

empower the Commission's Executive Director to hold an administrative hearing or

make determinations of reasonable cause.

15. Challenged Rule 60Y-2.004(2), Florida Administrative Code, clearly

supports the concept that statutory authority for substantive decision-making is

lodged in the Commission by the rule's declaration that the Executive Director

"is the chief administrative officer of the Commission and is responsible for

implementing policy of the Commission." Unfortunately, the rule concludes with

an internal inconsistency by assignment to the Executive Director of the duty to

"make determinations as provided in Rule 60Y-5.004, Florida Administrative Code.

See, Rule 60Y-2.004(2)(e), Florida Administrative Code.

16. Pursuant to Rule 60Y-5.004, Florida Administrative Code, the

Commission's Executive Director is clearly delegated authority by the Commission

to make a formal determination of the existence of reasonable cause that an

illegal employment practice exists with regard to a particular complaint.

17. Clearly, Rule 60Y-5.004, Florida Administrative Code, expands and

contravenes the statutory authority contained in Section 760.11(4), Florida

Statutes, which grants to the Commission, not the Executive Director, the

authority to make the substantive, non ministerial decisions known as reasonable

cause determinations.

18. Rule 60Y-5.004, Florida Administrative Code, further expands and

contravenes the statutory authority contained in Section 760.11(4), Florida

Statutes, by attempting to delegate to the Executive Director authority to make

determinations of no reasonable cause. Such attempted delegation by the

Commission of substantive decision making to the Executive Director is also

without statutory support.

19. As noted above, the Commission is an adjudicative body with the quasi-

judicial authority to determine the substantive rights of the parties in

accordance with statutory requirements and must be viewed as vested with more

than the mere authority to promulgate procedural rules. Each decision the

Commission makes has significant implications as to what rights a complainant or

an employer may exercise. Illustrative of the point is that a determination of

no reasonable cause impacts a complainant's substantive right, pursuant to

Section 760.11(4), Florida Statues, to pursue a judicial remedy. That right to

that remedy is either extinguished or substantially impacted inasmuch as the

complainant is then forced to follow the long and winding path of a formal

administrative proceeding before the Division of Administrative Hearings with

the end hope of a favorable recommended order which will be adopted by the

Commission in a final order. Statutory procedures which impose conditions or

restrictions upon the exercise of a substantive right are substantive laws.

See, Smith v. Dept. of Insurance, 507 So. 2d 1080 (Fla. 1987).

20. Respondent maintains that legislation establishing the Commission is a

rescript of the federal legislation creating the EEOC and, accordingly, must be

granted the interpretations given the federal act by federal courts.

21. Not only does Respondent's argument ignore substantive differences in

the purpose and the functions of the Commission, the EEOC and the remedies

available to affected parties under the respective statutes governing these two

bodies, nothing in the federal experience is instructive in determining whether

the Florida legislature has delegated authority to the Commission to authorize

the Executive Director to make reasonable cause determinations.

22. Accordingly, a decision by the Commission that no reasonable cause

exists is a substantive decision which defines or effects the exercise of a

substantive right since that decision forecloses or impairs the exercise of a

civil action in a state court. Foreclosing or impairing the substantive right

to pursue a complaint of discrimination by imposing substantial impediments to

its free exercise in the form of presuit administrative proofs is a substantive

decision which the Executive Director is not statutorily empowered to make.

23. Finally, while agency heads are granted the general authority to

delegate certain functions assigned them pursuant to Section 20.05(1)(b),

Florida Statutes, that authority is subject to limitation. Absent statutory

authority, only ministerial acts and not substantive powers vested specifically

in the agency head may be delegated. Attorney General Opinion 74-116.

CONCLUSION

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

ordered that Rules 60Y-2.004(2)(e) and 60Y-5.004, Florida Administrative Code,

constitute an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority and expressly

contravene the requirements of Chapter 760, Florida Statutes, in an attempt to

delegate nondelegable powers to the Executive Director of the Commission.

DONE and ORDERED in Tallahassee, Florida, this 13th day of October, 1995.

___________________________________

DON W. DAVIS, Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings

The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550

[phone]

Filed with the Clerk of the

Division of Administrative Hearings

this 13th day of October, 1995.

APPENDIX

In accordance with provisions of Section 120.59, Florida Statutes, the

following rulings are made on the proposed findings of fact submitted on behalf

of the parties.

Petitioner's Proposed Findings

1.-3. Accepted.

4. Adopted, by reference.

5.-6. Accepted.

7.-9. Rejected, subordinate.

10. Rejected, relevance.

Respondent's Proposed Findings

1.-7. Accepted.

8.-10. Rejected, unnecessary to result reached.

11.-13. Rejected, subordinate to HO findings.

14.-17. Accepted, not verbatim.

COPIES FURNISHED:

Gregory A. Chaires, Esquire

Allen R. Grossman, Esquire

Assistant Attorneys General

Office of the Attorney General

PL-01, The Capitol

Tallahassee, FL 32399-1050

Dana Baird, Esquire

Florida Commission on Human

Relations

325 John Knox Rd., Ste. 240

Tallahassee, FL 32303-4149

Sharon Moultry, Clerk

Human Relations Commission

325 John Knox Rd.

Bldg. F, Ste. 240

Tallahassee, FL 32303-4149

W. Douglas Moody, Jr., Esquire

Bateman Graham

300 East Park Avenue

Tallahassee, FL 32301

Carroll Webb

Executive Director

Administrative Procedures Committee

Holland Building, Room 120

Tallahassee, FL 32399-1300

APPELLATE RIGHTS

A PARTY WHO IS ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY THIS FINAL ORDER IS ENTITLED TO JUDICIAL

REVIEW PURSUANT TO SECTION 120.68, FLORIDA STATUTES. REVIEW PROCEEDINGS ARE

GOVERNED BY THE FLORIDA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE. SUCH PROCEEDINGS ARE

COMMENCED BY FILING ONE COPY OF THE NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE AGENCY CLERK OF

THE DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS AND A SECOND COPY, ACCOMPANIED BY FILING

FEES PRESCRIBED BY LAW, WITH THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST DISTRICT, OR

WITH THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL IN THE APPELLATE DISTRICT WHERE THE PARTY

RESIDES. THE NOTICE OF APPEAL MUST BE FILED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF RENDITION OF THE

ORDER TO BE REVIEWED.

=================================================================

DISTRICT COURT OPINION

=================================================================

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL

FIRST DISTRICT, STATE OF FLORIDA

FLORIDA COMMISSION ON HUMAN NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO

RELATIONS, FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND

DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED.

Appellant,

CASE NO. 95-3880

DOAH CASE NO. 95-3334RX

PARRISH MANAGEMENT, INC.,

Appellee.

______________________________/

Opinion filed August 15, 1996.

An appeal from an order of the Division of Administrative Hearings.

Dana Baird, General Counsel; Harden King, Assistant General Counsel, Florida

Commission on Human Relations, Tallahassee, for appellant.

W. Douglas Moody, Jr., of Bateman Graham, P.A., Tallahassee, for

appellee.

PER CURIAM

The Florida Commission on Human Relations challenges an order of the

Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) which holds Florida Administrative

Code Rules 60Y-2.004(2)(e) and 60Y-5.004 constitute invalid exercises of

delegated legislative authority and expressly contravene the requirements of

Chapter 760, Florida Statutes. We reverse because the Commission did not exceed

its delegated authority by enacting the challenged rules.

The Florida Commission on Human Relations is established by section 760.03,

Florida Statutes (1993), and is charged with the administration of the Florida

Civil Rights Act of 1992. A complaint of discrimination was filed with the

Commission naming appellee Parrish Management, Inc. as the respondent-employer.

After an investigation on the merits, the Executive Director of the Commission

issued an investigatory determination of reasonable cause to believe that an

unlawful employment practice had occurred.

In June 1995, Parrish Management filed a rule challenge proceeding on Rules

60Y-2.004(2)(e) and 60Y-5.004, Florida Administrative Code. Rule 60Y-

2.004(2)(e) provides:

60Y-2.004 General Description of Organization and

functions of Commission Staff

(2) The Executive Director is the chief administrative

officer of the Commission and is responsible for

implementing policy of the Commission. The Executive

Director is appointed by the Commission and may be

removed by the Commission for cause. The Executive

Director has the following duties:

(e) make determinations as provided by Rule 60Y-5.004

Rule 60Y-5.004 provides in pertinent part:

60Y-5.004 Executive Director's Investigatory Determina-

tion; Notice.

(1) Upon completion of an investigation, if a complaint

has not been settled or withdrawn, the Office of

Employment Investigations shall report the investigation,

with recommendation, to the Office of General Counsel.

The Office of General Counsel shall review the report and

shall make a recommendation to the Executive Director as

to whether there is reasonable cause to believe that an

unlawful employment practice has occurred.

(2) If the recommendation is based upon lack of

jurisdiction over the respondent or subject matter of the

complaint or upon untimely filing of the complaint, the

Executive Director may dismiss the complaint pursuant to

Subsection 60-5.006(3) or (11), provided that the

investigation does not reveal any disputed issues of

material fact. The Executive Director shall issue a

determination on the foregoing bases of lack of

jurisdiction or untimeliness where disputed issues of

material fact appear to exist.

(3) After a determination has been made by the Executive

Director, the Clerk shall serve a Notice of Determination,

with copies of the determination, upon the complainant

and the respondent.

Parrish Management argued, and DOAH found, that an investigatory determination

of no reasonable cause impacts a complainant's substantive right to pursue a

judicial remedy pursuant to section 760.11(4), Florida Statutes (1993). 1/

DOAH further found that the Commission may not delegate substantive powers

vested specifically with the agency head to the executive director. DOAH

reasoned that because section 760.06, which sets forth the powers of the

Commission, expressly allows delegation by the Commission to a commissioner or

the executive director of authority to issue subpoenas and administer oaths, the

Commission is limited to that delegation and may not delegate its other powers

and duties to the executive director.

Section 760.03, which creates the "Florida Commission on Human Relations",

provides that [t]he commission shall appoint, and may remove, an executive

director who, with the consent of the commission, may employ a deputy,

attorneys, investigators, clerks, and such other personnel as may be necessary

adequately to perform the functions of the commission within budgetary

limitations." s 760.03(7), Fla. Stat. Clearly the legislative intent is to allow

the Commission to delegate to the executive director the authority necessary to

adequately "perform the functions of the commission." Appellee contends that

section 760.06(6) restricts the delegation of the Commission's power to those

activities specifically mentioned; however, when read in pari materia with

section 760.03(7), that section cannot be so limited. If the term "commission"

as used in the statute is restricted solely to the panel of commissioners and

involved functions which the commissioners could not delegate, there would be no

need for a staff.

By statute, "the commission shall determine if there is reasonable cause to

believe that discriminatory practice has occurred in violation of the Florida

Civil Rights Act of 1992." s 760.11(3), Fla. Stat. The same statute also

provides, however, that the commission shall clearly stamp on the face of the

complaint the date the complaint was filed with the commission; shall within 5

days of the complaint being filed, send a copy of the complaint to the person

who allegedly committed the violation; shall investigate the allegations in the

complaint; and shall promptly notify the aggrieved person and the respondent of

the reasonable cause determination, the date of such determination, and the

options available under this section. s760.11, Fla. Stat. The term "Commission"

cannot be reasonably limited to signify only the panel of commissioners acting

collegially.

REVERSED.

BARFIELD, C.J. and KAHN, J., CONCUR; DAVIS, J. DISSENTS W/ WRITTEN OPINION

DAVIS, J., DISSENTING.

I respectfully dissent. In Chapter 760, Florida Statutes, the Legislature

conferred the responsibility for making the determination of reasonable cause on

the Commission. Section 760.11(3), Florida Statutes (1993). The challenged

rules, delegating that responsibility to the Executive Director, are an invalid

exercise of delegated legislative authority. The determination of reasonable

cause is a significant decision, which affords or precludes the right to bring a

civil action. Section 760.11(4), Florida Statutes (1993). This is not a

delegable ministerial act comparable to stamping a filing date on a complaint,

and therefore, is not delegable under section 20.05, Florida Statutes (1993). I

would affirm the well-reasoned order of the Hearing Officer.

ENDNOTE

1/ Section 760.11(4) provides:

In the event that the commission determines that there is

reasonable cause to believe that a discriminatory

practice has occurred in violation of the Florida Civil

Rights Act of 1992, the aggrieved person may either:

(a) Bring a civil action against the person named in the

complaint in any court of competent jurisdiction or

(b) Request an administrative hearing under s. 120.57.

MANDATE

From

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA

FIRST DISTRICT

To the Honorable DON W. DAVIS, Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings

WHEREAS, in that certain cause filed in this Court styled:

PARRISH MANAGEMENT, INC.

vs. CASE NO. 95-3880

YOUR CASE NO. 95-3334RX

FLORIDA COMMISSION ON HUMAN

RELATIONS

The attached opinion was rendered on August 15, 1996.

YOU ARE HEREBY COMMANDED that further proceedings be had in accordance with said

opinion, the rules of this Court and the laws of the State of Florida.

WITNESS the Honorable Edward T. Barfield

Chief Judge of the District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District and

the Seal of said court at Tallahassee, the Capitol, on this 6th day of December,

1996.

__________________________________________________

(seal) Karen Roberts

Deputy Clerk, District Court of Appeal of Florida,

First District