CATHERINE KELLY, APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, APPELLEE; ANNIE BAUZELA, APPELLANT, V. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, DISTRICT IX, PALM BEACH COUNTY, OFR/DPAF, APPELLEE; DELSIE WATERS, APPELLANT, V. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, DISTRICT IX, PALM BEACH COUNTY, OFR/DPAF, APPELLEE; ELIZABETH COLLINS, APPELLANT, V. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, APPELLEE; JOSEPH PETITHOMME, APPELLANT, V. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, DISTRICT IX, PALM BEACH COUNTY OFR/DPAF, APPELLEE; MICHELLE LIANA, APPELLANT, V. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, APPELLEE; NELLIE MAE SHEELY, APPELLANT, V. DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Indigency cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Each appellant has appealed a final order of the appellee entered upon a recommended order of an officer of the Division of Administrative Hearings after a formal hearing pursuant to section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes. Each moved the agency to provide a transcript of the hearing at no cost and each was found to be indigent. The agency refused to prepare the transcripts and the appellants then moved this court to compel the agency to provide them at no cost. We deny the motions of the appellants on authority of Harris v. Department of Corrections, 486 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). As we did in Harris and Curran v. Florida Probation and Parole Commission, 498 So. 2d 629 (Fla. 1st DCA, 1986), we certify the following to be a question of great public importance:
DOES SECTION 57.081, FLA.STAT., AUTHORIZE OR REQUIRE THAT INDIGENT APPELLANTS IN NONCRIMINAL APPEALS BE PROVIDED WITH TRANSCRIPTS AT NO COST TO THEM?
BOOTH, C.J., and MILLS and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Smith v. Dep't OF Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 573 So. 2d 320 (Fla. 1991)…opinion. EHRLICH, J., concurs in part and dissents in part with an opinion, in which BARKETT and KOGAN, JJ., concur. . Smith v. Department of Health & Rehab. Servs., 504 So. 2d 801 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Kelly v. Department of Health & Rehab. Servs., 502 So. 2d 42 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Harris v. Department of Corrections, 486 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). . Several of the petitioners seek review of a hearing officer’s determination of an intentional food-stamp violation; one of them complains of the rejectio…
-
Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n v. Rica Gretz, 519 So. 2d 1025 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988)…not necessary to the prosecution of a claim, given the availability of a transcript. . See also Smith v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 504 So. 2d 801 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987); Kelly v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 502 So. 2d 42 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); and Curran v. Florida Probation and Parole Commission, 498 So. 2d 629 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), all certifying similar questions to the supreme court.…
Authorities Cited
- Harris v. Dep't OF Corr., 486 So. 2d 27 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- Curran v. Fla. Prob. & Parole Comm'n, 498 So. 2d 629 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)