DR. MORRY S. FOX, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, BOARD OF OSTEOPATHIC MEDICAL EXAMINERS, APPELLEE
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.
Dr. Fox appealed the Board of Osteopathic Medical Examiners' denial of his petition for a declaratory statement. The court affirmed the Board's denial, holding that declaratory statement proceedings are not appropriate when the same issues are simultaneously being litigated in administrative or judicial proceedings.
The court affirmed the Board's denial of the petition for declaratory statement, holding that such proceedings are not properly filed on issues simultaneously litigated in judicial or other administrative proceedings. The court rejected Fox's argument that the dismissal of the administrative proceedings created a live controversy, finding that the jurisdictional issues at stake were expressly treated in the DOAH orders.
[1] A petition for declaratory statement is not properly filed when the issues presented are simultaneously litigated in other judicial or administrative proceedings.
[2] An administrative board cannot interfere with the jurisdiction of duly constituted judicial bodies.
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“declaratory statement proceedings, by analogy to Chapter 86, Florida Statutes, are not properly filed on issues simultaneously litigated in judicial or other administrative proceedings of the character here involved.”
Establishes the core holding that petitions for declaratory statements are not the appropriate procedural vehicle when the same issues are pending in other forums.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDr. Fox filed a petition for a declaratory statement with the Board of Osteopathic Medical Examiners on August 31, 1979 (amended October 15, 1979). Th…
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 Jurisdiction Of Administrative Bodies cases and more on FLexlaw
WENTWORTH, Judge.
Appellant Fox challenges an order of the appellee Board dated August 31, 1979, and amended on October 15, 1979, denying a petition for declaratory statement because:
1. ... The issues concerned in the Petition are now before the Division of Administrative Hearings pursuant to Section 120.57, Florida Statutes, involving the Board and Petitioner. Furthermore, those same issues are presently pending before the First District Court of Appeal, again involving the Board and the Petitioner. The Board cannot interfere with the jurisdiction of those judiciary bodies in the exercise of their duly constituted jurisdiction.
2. The matters presented in Petitioner’s Petition for Declaratory Statement will be reviewed by the Board at the time that a Recommended Order is received from the Division of Administrative Hearings pursuant to Chapter 120, Florida Statutes.
Other deficiencies in procedure and substance were also cited. Not noted in the order, but reflected by the record, is the filing of injunctive proceedings in the circuit court on September 5, 1979, on the same subject matter. Since all questions posed in the petition for declaratory statement related to matters connected with the pending § 120.57 proceeding, the Board argues mootness as a result of a Department of Administrative Hearings order of September 19, 1979, dismissing those proceedings. Fox contends even the demise of those proceedings left a live controversy because the subject matter of his petition for declaratory statement “could not properly be resolved at a full fledged § 120.57 hearing by the Division of Administrative Hearings inasmuch as it was the power or jurisdiction of DOAH itself which was at issue in terms of ‘default’ of Dr. Fox [by the Board] into the DOAH.” That power and jurisdiction, however, was expressly treated in the DOAH orders in the § 120.57 proceeding, from which no appeal was taken (logically, since jurisdiction was ultimately exercised in Fox’s favor). In any event, we conclude the reasoning of the court in Couch v. State Department of Health & Rehabilitative Services, 377 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979), is dispositive on the point that declaratory statement proceedings, by analogy to Chapter 86, Florida Statutes, are not properly filed on issues simultaneously litigated in judicial or other administrative proceedings of the character here involved.
The order is accordingly affirmed.
JOANOS, J., and WOODIE A. LILES (Ret.), Associate Judge, concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Harlow J. Kies and Doris Kies v. Fla. Ins. Guar. Ass'n, Inc., 435 So. 2d 410 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)…ntertained a separate action for declaratory judgment on an issue properly raised in the pleadings in the main action, and already before the court. See Taylor v. Cooper, 60 So. 2d 534 (Fla.1952); Fox v. State Board of Osteopathic Medical Examiners, 395 So. 2d 192 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); Adams v. Citizens Bank of Brevard, 248 So. 2d 682 (Fla. 4th DCA 1971). While we recognize the right of the trial court to sever the issue of insurance coverage and try that issue separately, Fla.R.Civ.P. 1.270(b); Beta Eta House…
-
Kenneth Novice, M.D. v. Dep't of Health, 816 So. 2d 1237 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)…, 377 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979). In Couch, the first district upheld a refusal to issue a declaratory statement which was based on the fact that there was already a court proceeding. See also Fox v. State, Board of Osteopathic Medical Examiners, 395 So. 2d 192 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981) (appropriate to deny petition for declaratory statement where issues raised currently pending in administrative hearings). AFFIRMED. THOMPSON, C.J., and PALMER, J., concur. . The Agreement was originally entered into between I…
-
Gopman v. Dep't of Educ., 908 So. 2d 1118 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)…, 377 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979). In Couch, the first district upheld a refusal to issue a declaratory statement which was based on the fact that there was already a court proceeding. See also Fox v. State, Board of Osteopathic Medical Examiners, 395 So. 2d 192 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981) (appropriate to deny petition for declaratory statement where issues raised currently pending in administrative hearings). Novick v. Dep’t of Health, Bd. of Med., 816 So. 2d 1237, 1240 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). In Fox v. State, Bd. o…1 / 2
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Bobby Ray Couch et ux. v. State, 377 So. 2d 32 (Fla. 1st DCA 1979)