CHARLES W. CHERRY, PETITIONER,
v.
DR. OSWALD P. BRONSON AND BETHUNE-COOKMAN COLLEGE, RESPONDENTS
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 court held that a petitioner seeking declaratory relief regarding the impartiality of an administrative hearing need not exhaust administrative remedies if those remedies are inadequate.
[1] A party seeking a declaratory judgment must demonstrate uncertainty as to a right, status, immunity, power, or privilege and have an actual, practical, and present need f…
[2] The doctrine of exhaustion of administrative remedies applies only when the available administrative remedy is adequate.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA tenured professor facing dismissal sought damages and declaratory relief, alleging the college president's bias and inadequacy of the administrative…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Impartial Decision Maker cases and more on FLexlaw
SHARP, Judge.
Petitioner seeks review by writ of certiorari of the trial court’s order granting a motion to dismiss for failure to state a cause of action. Cherry is a tenured member of the Bethune-Cookman College faculty and director of the College’s Cooperative Education Program. The respondents are Dr. Bronson, President of Bethune-Cook-man College, and Bethune-Cookman College. We quash the order in part.
Upon receiving a notice of dismissal for cause from Bethune-Cookman College, Cherry requested a hearing on the charges in accordance with his rights set forth in the Administrative Faculty and Staff Handbook. He further requested that Dr. Bronson recuse himself from participation in the hearing due to partiality. Dr. Bronson refused. Cherry sought damages in the trial court alleging unilateral breach of his employment contract and malicious interference with his business relationship and he sought declaratory relief, alleging uncertainty of his rights under the faculty hand book.
The trial court granted the respondents’ motion to dismiss on the ground that the plaintiff failed to exhaust his administrative remedies by proceeding with the scheduled hearing and appealing its outcome to whatever administrative review body was provided. It allowed Cherry twenty days after the conclusion of the administrative remedies in which to amend his complaint.
Declaratory judgments are appropriate to afford parties relief from insecurity and uncertainty with regards to rights or legal relationships. Jones v. Howland, 369 So. 2d 438 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979).
The test recognized in this state of whether or not a complaint will give rise to a proceeding under the Declaratory Judgment Act inquires whether or not the party seeking a declaration shows that he is in doubt or is uncertain as to the existence or non-existence of some right, status, immunity, power or privilege and has an actual, practical and present need for a declaration.
Hialeah Race Course v. Gulfstream Rac. Ass’n., 210 So. 2d 750, 752 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968). The petitioner alleged he was uncertain as to the nature of his remedies under the college procedure and applicable law. He was being forced to defend his position in an administrative hearing imminently scheduled.
Cherry as a tenured teacher faced with dismissal charges is clearly entitled to a due process hearing. Texton v. Hancock, 359 So. 2d 895 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Perry v. Sindermann, 408 U.S. 593, 92 S.Ct. 2694, 33 L.Ed.2d 570 (1972).
The administrative handbook itself states that the college will not deny a teacher the right of due process. An essential element of a due proces hearing is an impartial decision maker. Megill v. Board of Regents of the State of Florida, 541 F. 2d 1073 (5th Cir. 1976); Ferguson v. Thomas, 430 F. 2d 852 (5th Cir. 1970).
One basis for Cherry’s application to the lower court was to insure that he received a fair hearing by impartial decision makers. In order to carry out that right, Charles Cherry is entitled to a declaration of his rights under his employment contract and under the administrative handbook.
The trial court did not reach this issue. It held that the petitioner would have to exhaust his administrative remedies by participating in the administrative hearing before he could apply to the court for relief.
However, the doctrine that administrative remedies must be exhausted applies only when the administrative remedy is available and adequate. State ex rel. Department of General Serv. v. Willis, 344 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977); Northeast Airlines, Inc. v. Weiss, 113 So. 2d 884 (Fla. 3d DCA 1959). The administrative remedies available to petitioner as set forth in his complaint are not adequate because they do not provide him with a fair and impartial hearing.
Therefore, they need not be exhausted. State ex rel. Allen v. Board of Public Instruction, 214 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968); State ex rel. Dept. of General Serv. v. Willis, 344 So. 2d (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). It would be an exercise in futility to require Cherry to participate in an administrative hearing that does not meet the essential requirements of due process.
Petitioner’s actions for specific performance and damages are premature and were properly dismissed by the trial court. However, that portion of the order dismissing the complaint for declaratory relief is quashed. We remand this matter to the trial court to determine whether the allegations concerning Bronson’s partiality are supported by substantial evidence, and to enter such orders as may be appropriate to assure petitioner a fair and impartial administrative hearing.
ORDER QUASHED IN PART AND REMANDED.
DAUKSCH, C. J., and CROSS, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
State v. E.D.S. Fed. Corp., 631 So. 2d 353 (Fla. 1st DCA 1994)…biased decision maker, and this court cannot reach such conclusion as a matter of law on the record before it. Agencies are commonly called upon to decide disputes to which they are a party under the Administrative Procedure Act. Cherry v. Bronson, 384 So. 2d 169 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980), which EDS relies upon, is not inconsistent with the above rule in that the court simply stated [*357] that before the petitioner would be required to participate in the administrative hearing on his termination from the faculty,…
-
Winter Springs Dev. Corp. v. Fla. Power Corp., 402 So. 2d 1225 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)…the same remedy, Florida Welding and Erection Service, Inc. v. American Mutual Insurance Company, 285 So. 2d 386 (Fla.1973), a plaintiff is not required to pursue administrative remedies where they are not available and adequate. Cherry v. Bronson, 384 So. 2d 169 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). Therefore, where, as here, a plaintiff seeks money damages for breach of contract, which an administrative body is not empowered to award, the administrative remedy is not considered adequate and the plaintiff is not bound to ex…
-
Deseret Ranches OF Fla., Inc. v. State, 392 So. 2d 1016 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981)…te’s police power. There has been no showing that there exists an administrative remedy which could grant appellant the requested relief. Therefore, the doctrine that administrative remedies must first be exhausted does not apply. Cherry v. Bronson, 384 So. 2d 169 (Fla. 5th DCA 1980). See E. T. Legg & Co. v. Franza, 383 So. 2d 962 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). It would be pointless to require appellant to endure the time and expense of a full administrative proceeding. Franza at 964. See Gulf Pines Memorial Park v. Oa…
Authorities Cited
- Perry v. Sindermann, 408 U.S. 593 (U.S. 1972)
- State of Fla. ex rel. Dep't OF Gen. Servs. v. Willis, 344 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)
- Ferguson v. Thomas, 430 F.2d 852 (5th Cir. 1970)
- Megill v. Bd. OF Regents OF the State OF Fla., 541 F.2d 1073 (5th Cir. 1976)
- Gen. Accident Fire & Life Assurance Co. v. Collins, 210 So. 2d 750 (Fla. 3d DCA 1968)
- Ne. Airlines, Inc. v. Weiss, 113 So. 2d 884 (Fla. 3d DCA 1959)
- State of Fla. ex rel. Robert E. Allen, Sr. v. Weimern and Lee E. Williams, 214 So. 2d 7 (Fla. 4th DCA 1968)
- Texton v. Hancock, 359 So. 2d 895 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)
- Goldwyn Christensson and Elaine Christensson v. Plotner, 369 So. 2d 438 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)
- Jones v. Howland, 369 So. 2d 438 (Fla. 3d DCA 1979)