DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, DIVISION OF LABOR, APPELLANT,
v.
FLORIDA HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION ET AL., APPELLEES, V. FLORIDA BUILDING TRADES COUNCIL ET AL., INTERVENORS
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 Department of Labor and Employment Security appealed an administrative decision invalidating its Rule 8C-16.05(2)(e) on standing grounds. The First District Court of Appeal reversed, holding that the builder associations lacked standing to challenge the rule because they were not themselves substantially affected parties and the actual builders affected by the rule were not parties to the case.
The associations lack standing because they are not substantially affected parties under § 120.56. Although the rule affects the builders represented by the associations, the builders themselves are not parties to the case, and the associations cannot assert their members' interests in challenging the rule.
[1] A person must be substantially affected by a rule to have standing to challenge its validity under § 120.56, Florida Statutes.
[2] An association lacks standing to challenge a rule on behalf of its members when the members themselves are not parties to the proceeding and have not sustained or are not…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Any person substantially affected by a rule may seek an administrative determination of the invalidity of the rule on the ground that the rule is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority”
Establishes the statutory standing requirement under § 120.56(1) that is the basis for the court's holding
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe Department of Labor and Employment Security adopted Rule 8C-16.05(2)(e). The Florida Home Builders Association and other builder associations chal…
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.
McCORD, Judge.
This is an appeal from a final order of the Division of Administrative Hearings finding appellant’s Rule 8C-16.05(2)(e) 2 and 5 to be an invalid exercise of delegated authority. Among other issues raised on this appeal, appellant contends that appellees do not have standing to challenge its rule pursuant to § 120.56, Florida Statutes. We agree.
Section 120.56, Florida Statutes, in pertinent part states as follows:
(1) Any person substantially affected by a rule may seek an administrative determination of the invalidity of the rule on the ground that the rule is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority-
(2) The petition seeking an administrative determination under this section shall be in writing and shall state with particularity facts sufficient to show the person seeking relief is substantially affected by the rule and facts sufficient to show the invalidity of the rule ... (emphasis supplied)
Here appellees are building contractor-associations, and the hearing officer found that the builders represented by the associations were competitively disadvantaged by operation of the challenged rule. Our ruling is governed by our opinion in Fla. Dept. of Ed. v. Fla. Ed. Ass’n/United, etc., S78 So. 2d 893 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979). There appellee was a confederation of bargaining units representing 30 thousand of the 90 thousand teachers of Florida. While the rule there being challenged would affect teachers, we said: However, no teacher is a party to this case. Accordingly, we find FEA/United lacks standing under the facts and principles stated in Florida Department of Offender Rehabilitation v. Jerry, 353 So. 2d 1230, 1235-1236 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978).
Here, no party has sustained or is in immediate danger of sustaining some direct injury as a result of the challenged rule.
Accordingly, FEA/United is not a “substantially affected” person as contemplated in Florida Department of Offender Rehabilitation v. Jerry, supra.
By the same token, the builders who are affected by the rule in the case sub judice are not parties. The builder associations are not substantially affected parties and therefore have no standing to challenge the rule.
Reversed.
MILLS, C. J., and SHIVERS, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fla. Home Builders Ass'n v. Dep't OF Labor & Emp. Sec., 412 So. 2d 351 (Fla. 1982)…OVERTON, Justice. This is a petition to review the decision of the First District Court of Appeal, reported as Department of Labor and Employment Security v. Florida Home Builders Association, 392 So. 2d 21 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980), which held that a trade association does not have standing under section 120.56(1), Flori [*352] da Statutes (1979),1 to challenge the validity of an agency rule unless the association itself is substantially affected by the rul…
-
Fla. Med. Ass'n, Inc. v. Dep't OF Prof'l Reg., 426 So. 2d 1112 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)…). Professional Fireñghters, 396 So. 2d at 396. As to standing of associations, generally, see Florida Home Builders Association v. Department of Labor and Employment Security, 412 So. 2d 351 (Fla.1982), reversing the decision of this court found at 392 So. 2d 21. . At footnote 5, page 733, 92 S.Ct. at footnote 5, page 1365, the Sierra Club opinion states that the court does not reach any question concerning the meaning of the “zone of interest” test or its possible application to the facts of the case. .…
-
NAACP, Inc. v. Fla. Bd. OF Regents, 863 So. 2d 294 (Fla. 2003)…le challenge under section 120.56, Florida Statutes (1979), but the First District reversed, finding that such an association was not a substantially affected party. Id. at 352 (citing Dep’t of Labor & Employment Sec. v. Florida Home Builders Ass’n, 392 So. 2d 21, 22 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)). However, as in the instant case, the First District certified a question of great public importance: Whether, under section 120.56, Florida Statutes, a trade association, which is not itself affected by an agency rule but…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- The Fla. Dep't OF Offender Rehab. v. Leroy Jerry and the Florida Division of Administrative Hearings, 353 So. 2d 1230 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)