CATHY M. THOMAS, APPELLANT,
v.
OFFICE OF THE SHERIFF, 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.
Thomas sought certiorari review of a circuit court decision that reversed a Civil Service Board order reinstating her as a sergeant after she was demoted by the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office. The appellate court held that the Civil Service Board's order was procedurally defective for lacking findings of fact and conclusions of law, but the circuit court improperly substituted its own judgment rather than remanding for the Board to provide adequate findings.
The Board's order was defective due to the absence of findings of fact and conclusions of law, but the circuit court erred by substituting its own evaluation of the evidence rather than remanding the matter for the Board to provide proper findings. Certiorari is granted and the case is remanded for the Board to issue findings of fact and conclusions of law, including whether the employee evaluation system constituted a rule the sheriff was required to follow.
[1] An administrative board's order is defective and subject to reversal on due process grounds when it lacks findings of fact and fails to determine the pertinent rules or r…
[2] A circuit court, sitting in its appellate capacity, departs from the proper scope of review when it undertakes its own evaluation of evidence and determination of applica…
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“The absence of findings of fact by the Board and its failure to determine the rules or regulations pertinent to the matter being reviewed by it renders its order defective and subject to reversal on due process grounds.”
Establishes the due process requirement for administrative agencies to provide findings of fact and conclusions of law
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThomas was demoted to patrolman at the end of her six-month probationary period with the Jacksonville Sheriff's Office. She filed a complaint with the…
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 Scope Of Appellate Review cases and more on FLexlaw
SMITH, Judge.
Thomas seeks certiorari review of an opinion of the circuit court, sitting in its appellate capacity, which reversed a decision of the Civil Service Board ordering her to be reinstated to her position as a sergeant with the Jacksonville Sheriff’s Office and extending her probationary period for three months.
The sheriff demoted Thomas to patrolman at the end of her six-month probationary period. Thomas filed a complaint with the Civil Service Board alleging that her demotion was in violation of the employee performance evaluation system which the sheriff was required to follow.
At the end of the second hearing on Thomas’ complaint, one of the Board members moved that Thomas be reinstated on the grounds that her evaluation had not been done properly. The Board voted unanimously to reinstate Thomas and extend her probationary period three months. The Board’s order does not contain any findings of fact or conclusions of law.
On appeal to the circuit court, the sheriff contended that the employee performance evaluation system did not rise to the level of a rule which he was required to follow. The circuit court found that the record was devoid of any proof that a rule of the Board was violated and reversed the action of the Board with instructions to reinstate the sheriff’s order demoting Thomas. The court went on to find that even if the employee performance evaluation system constituted a proposed rule, it had not been approved as provided by law.
The absence of findings of fact by the Board and its failure to determine the rules or regulations pertinent to the matter being reviewed by it renders its order defective and subject to reversal on due process grounds. Irvine v. Duval County Planning Commission, 466 So. 2d 357, 362 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (dissenting opinion by Judge Zehmer), approved, 495 So. 2d 167 (Fla.1986), adopted on remand, 504 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). Here, in the face of a record and an order obviously unclear as to the basis for the Board’s decision, the trial court undertook its own evaluation of the evidence and determination of the rules applicable in the administrative proceeding below. In so doing, the trial court departed from the proper scope of circuit court review in its appellate capacity. City of Deerfield Beach v. Vaillant, 399 So. 2d 1045 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981), affirmed, 419 So. 2d 624 (Fla.1982); City of Hollywood v. South Broward Hospital District, 504 So. 2d 1308 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987); City of Miami v. Lopez, 487 So. 2d 1111, 1112 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986).
On remand, the Civil Service Board shall be required to set forth its findings of fact and conclusions of law upon which its ultimate decision is based which shall include, among other things, the basic jurisdictional facts necessary to show that it is acting within its limited powers, and which shall specifically determine whether the employee evaluation system was a rule or regulation which the sheriff was required to follow. See, generally, 1 Fla.Jur.2d, Administrative Law, § 83.
Certiorari is granted, the opinion of the circuit court is quashed, and it is directed that the order of the Board be set aside and the cause remanded for further proceedings consistent with this opinion.
SHIVERS and WENTWORTH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Harrison v. Neumann, 760 So. 2d 1015 (Fla. 4th DCA 2000)…lated due process). We recognize that there is a brief summary of evidence in the board’s memo; however, patently, there are no material findings. See Smith v. Metropolitan Dade County, 532 So. 2d 84 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988); Thomas v. Office of Sheriff, 507 So. 2d 145 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); City of Miami v. Lopez, 487 So. 2d 1111 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986). In Gramm, this court held that the failure of a civil service review board to include written findings of fact or conclusions of law in its employment termination orde…
-
Bryant v. Beary, 665 So. 2d 385 (Fla. 5th DCA 1996)…ffice under the Administrative Procedure Act. Nor does the special law pertaining to the Orange County Sheriffs Office, Chapter 89-507 bring that office under the APA. Nor have any judicial opinions so held. In fact, Thomas v. Office of the Sheriff, 507 So. 2d 145 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987) indicates appellate jurisdiction lies, if anywhere, in the circuit court. Thus, we grant the Sheriffs motion to dismiss this case for lack of jurisdiction. See Sweetwater Utility Corp. v. Hillsborough County, 314 So. 2d 194 (Fla.…
-
Smith v. Metro. Dade Cnty., 532 So. 2d 84 (Fla. 3d DCA 1988)…e therein any findings of fact or conclusions of law regarding the specific employee misconduct at issue requires that the case be remanded for that purpose. City of Miami v. Lopez, 487 So. 2d 1111 (Fla.3d DCA 1986); see Thomas v. Office of Sheriff, 507 So. 2d 145 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). Accordingly, certiorari is granted and the circuit court’s opinion affirming the former county manager’s determination is quashed. The cause is remanded to the circuit court with directions to set aside the manager’s determina…
Authorities Cited
- City OF Deerfield Beach v. Vaillant, 419 So. 2d 624 (Fla. 1982)
- Irvine v. Duval Cnty. Planning Comm'n, 495 So. 2d 167 (Fla. 1986)
- City OF Deerfield Beach v. Vaillant, 399 So. 2d 1045 (Fla. 4th DCA 1981)
- Irvine v. Duval Cnty. Planning Comm'n & the City Of Jacksonville, 466 So. 2d 357 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- Irvine v. Duval Cnty. Planning Comm'n & the City of Jacksonville, 504 So. 2d 1265 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- City OF Miami v. Lopez, 487 So. 2d 1111 (Fla. 3d DCA 1986)
- City OF Hollywood v. S. Broward Hosp. Dist., 504 So. 2d 1308 (Fla. 4th DCA 1987)