LEDFORD RIVERS, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE, 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.
The Florida Department of Revenue sought to dismiss Ledford Rivers' appeal as untimely because he failed to file notice of appeal within 30 days of the Department of Administration's January 24, 1986 final ruling. Although Rivers later filed a notice of appeal from a replacement order dated February 24, 1986, the court held that the February order did not restart the appeal period and dismissed the appeal as untimely.
No. The February 24, 1986 replacement order did not restart the appeal period because no statute or rule authorizes an administrative agency to retain jurisdiction over its final order once filed to permit withdrawal or modification of it, and the replacement order made no substantive change from the January 24, 1986 final agency action. Therefore, Rivers' appeal was untimely.
[1] A notice of appeal must be filed within thirty days of the rendition of the order to be reviewed to vest an appellate court with jurisdiction.
[2] An untimely motion for reconsideration does not toll the time for filing a notice of appeal.
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“no statute or rule authorizes the filing of a motion for rehearing which tolls the time for appealing a final agency order”
Establishes that the administrative appeal deadline cannot be extended by requesting reconsideration
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceOn January 24, 1986, the Department of Administration issued a final ruling adverse to Rivers in an employee grievance matter. The order informed Rive…
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 Final Agency Action cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
The Department of Revenue seeks to dismiss appellant’s appeal as untimely.
On January 24, 1986, the Department of Administration issued a final ruling adverse to appellant Ledford Rivers, Jr., in respect to an employee grievance he filed. The Department’s order explained the basis of the ruling and advised that it constituted final agency action. It also informed appellant that judicial review in the first or second district court of appeal could be instituted by filing notice of appeal within thirty days from the date the letter was filed in the official records of the Department of Administration. That date was certified to be January 24, 1986.
No appeal was taken from the Department’s ruling. However, in response to a discussion by Rivers with the general counsel of the Department of Administration, the Department entered a new order on February 24, 1986 “to replace our order sent to you on January 24, 1986.” Appellant filed a timely notice of appeal from the order rendered February 24, 1986. We note that no statute or rule authorizes the filing of a motion for rehearing which tolls the time for appealing a final agency order. See Taylor v. State, 493 So. 2d 498 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). Furthermore, there is no express authority by statute or rule for an administrative agency to retain jurisdiction over its final order, once filed, so as to permit the agency to withdraw the order and change or modify it. Taylor. Hence, any request by Rivers for reconsideration did not have the effect of staying the rendition of the order. While the Department s letter of February 24, 1986, sets out detailed statements of fact and conclusions of law, it does not make any substantive change from the final agency action filed by the Department on January 24, 1986.
Accordingly, we grant the Department of Revenue’s motion to dismiss appellant’s appeal on the ground that it was untimely filed. Fla.R.App.P. 9.110(b), (c). State ex rel Florida Department of Natural Resources v. District Court of Appeal, Second District, 355 So. 2d 772 (Fla.1978).
DANAHY, C.J., and SCHEB and SANDERLIN, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- William N. Taylor, M.D. v. Dep't of Prof'l Reg., 493 So. 2d 498 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986)
- State of Fla. ex rel. Fla. Dep't OF Natural Res. & Reubin O'D. Askew v. Dist. Court OF Appeal OF Fla., 355 So. 2d 772 (Fla. 1978)