THE SCHOOL BOARD OF BROWARD COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPELLANT,
v.
DAVID L. AND GERALDINE GRAMITH, FOR THEMSELVES AND ON BEHALF OF THEIR MINOR CHILD, KEVIN SCOTT GRAMITH, AND BENJAMIN F. AND MARY G. CARROLL, FOR THEMSELVES AND ON BEHALF OF THEIR MINOR CHILD, BENJAMIN F. CARROLL, III, APPELLEES
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The Florida First District Court of Appeal reversed a hearing officer's decision invalidating a school board's rule designating school boundaries because the board failed to prepare an economic impact statement. The court held that the failure to prepare an economic impact statement was harmless error where the governing statute did not require consideration of economic factors and no showing was made that the proceeding was impaired.
The court reversed the hearing officer's decision, holding that the board's failure to prepare an economic impact statement was harmless error. The court concluded that absent a showing that the proceedings were impaired or that the correctness of the action was affected, invalidation of the rule was improper.
[1] An agency's failure to prepare an economic impact statement is harmless error if the fairness of the proceeding or the correctness of the action is not impaired.
[2] A rule may be invalidated for failure to prepare an economic impact statement only if the governing statute requires consideration of economic factors.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“before an agency's action should be invalidated on the ground it violated some provision of the APA, the court should first determine, as required by Section 120.68(8), whether the fairness of the proceeding or the correctness of the action was found to be impaired.”
Establishes the harmless error standard for reviewing agency action under the Administrative Procedure Act
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe School Board of Broward County adopted a rule designating school boundaries for pupils in the north-central area of the county. The board did not …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
ERVIN, Acting Chief Judge.
The Board appeals a hearing officer’s determination in rule-challenge proceedings that its rule designating school boundaries for pupils in the north-central area of Bro-ward County was invalid for the Board’s failure to prepare an economic impact statement. We reverse.
In Department of HRS v. Delray Hospital Corp., 373 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), we reversed the Department’s rule-amendment for such failure. There, however, the Department’s rule was promulgated under Section 381.494, Florida Statutes (1977), which directs the department in at least four instances to consider long and short-term economic consequences of its decisions under the section. See Section 381.494(3) and (5)c at (4), (8), (11) and (12).
Section 120.68(8) prescribes judicial review standards for all agency action. In White Advertising International v. DOT, 368 So. 2d 411, 414 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979) (Ervin, J., sp. concurring and dissenting), it was stated that before an agency’s action should be invalidated on the ground it violated some provision of the APA, the court should first determine, as required by Sec tion 120.68(8), whether the fairness of the proceeding or the correctness of the action was found to be impaired. This harmless error test was applied also by the Second District Court of Appeal in Polk v. School Board of Polk County, 373 So. 2d 960 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979), on facts practically identical to those here, where the court held: “[I]n this particular rule-making action,’ which was limited to the setting of attendance zones, the failure to submit an economic impact statement was harmless error.” Here, the boundary designations were promulgated under the Board’s authority in Section 230.232, Florida Statutes (1977), which does not set forth economic factors for the Board’s consideration. The hearing officer did not describe how the proceedings were impaired by the Board’s failure to prepare the economic impact statement, and the appellees make no showing in this appeal.
We conclude that in the absence of such a showing, it was error to invalidate the Board’s rule.
REVERSED.
BOOTH and LARRY G. SMITH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dep't OF Prof'l Reg. v. Zia Durrani, 455 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)…ation of an EIS is a procedural aspect of rulemaking that is subject to the harmless error rule. Plantation Residents’Association, Inc. v. School Board of Broward County, 424 So. 2d 879 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982); School Board of Broward County v. Gramith, 375 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); Polk v. School Board of Polk County, 373 So. 2d 960 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). Therefore before the agency action adopting Rule 21M-29.01(2) may be invalidated on the ground that it was not accompanied by an appropriate EIS, the court…
-
Peoples Bank OF Indian River Cnty. (proposed new bank) v. State, 395 So. 2d 521 (Fla. 1981)…ns did not assure reasonable promise of successful operation for the appellant bank and other banks already operating in the area. The district court held, however, that the error was harmless error, citing School Board of Broward County v. Gramith, 375 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), and Polk v. School Board of Polk County, 373 So. 2d 960 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979). We agree with the cited authorities’ conclusion that a harmless error rule for review of agency action is suggested under section 120.68(8) of the Admin…
-
Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. Wright, 439 So. 2d 937 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)…rror in procedure in an administrative proceeding impairs the fairness of the proceedings or the correctness of the action taken. Polk v. School Board of Polk County, 373 So. 2d 960, 962 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979); School Board of Broward County v. Gramith, 375 So. 2d 340 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979); Plantation Residents’ Association, Inc. v. School Board of Broward County, 424 So. 2d 879, 881 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982). Thus, the absence or insufficiency of an economic impact statement is harmless error if it is established that t…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 8 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Polk v. The Sch. Bd. OF Polk Cnty., 373 So. 2d 960 (Fla. 2d DCA 1979)
- White Advertising Int'l v. State, 368 So. 2d 411 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)
- Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs. v. Delray Hosp. Corp. & Medfield Corp., 373 So. 2d 75 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)