WILLIAM H. SCHARRER, SR., APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE, 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.
William H. Scharrer, Sr. appealed a two-year suspension of his real estate license by the Florida Real Estate Commission following an informal hearing. The Third District Court of Appeal affirmed the suspension, rejecting all three of Scharrer's arguments on appeal.
The suspension was proper and supported by law. The typographical error in the administrative complaint was harmless and did not prejudice the appellant. The informal hearing provided adequate notice, a convenient location and time, and sufficient opportunity for the appellant to present evidence.
[1] A typographical error in an administrative complaint that does not prejudice or mislead the respondent is harmless surplusage and does not invalidate disciplinary action.
[2] A licensee is subject to disciplinary action for conviction of federal income tax violations under Section 475.25(1)(f), Florida Statutes.
Previewing 2 of 5 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 fact that the administrative complaint filed below contains a typographical error as to the above-stated statute [i.e., the complaint cites subsection (l)(k) instead of (l)(f) of the said statute] cannot change this result because such an error was obviously harmless sur-plusage which in no way prejudiced or misled the appellant”
Establishes that minor clerical errors in administrative pleadings do not constitute reversible error if they do not prejudice the party
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceScharrer was charged with federal income tax violations and such convictions were established at the administrative hearing below. The administrative …
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 Administrative Disciplinary Action cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This is an appeal from a final administrative order of the Florida Real Estate Commission suspending for a period of two years the real estate license of the appellant William H. Scharrer, Sr. after an informal hearing below. The appellant raises three points on appeal which we conclude fail to present reversible error. We accordingly affirm.
First, there can be no doubt on this record that the appellant was charged with having been convicted of federal income tax violations, that such convictions were clearly shown below, and that, accordingly, the appellant was subject to disciplinary action pursuant to Section 475.25(l)(f), Florida Statutes (1985). The fact that the administrative complaint filed below contains a typographical error as to the above-stated statute [i.e., the complaint cites subsection (l)(k) instead of (l)(f) of the said statute] cannot change this result because such an error was obviously harmless surplusage which in no way prejudiced or misled the appellant. Florida Bd. of Pharmacy v. Levin, 190 So. 2d 768 (Fla.1966).
Second, there is no merit to the argument that the informal hearing conducted below failed to allow the appellant an opportunity to present evidence in his be half at a convenient time and place. See § 120.57(2)(a)(2), Fla.Stat. (1985). The appellant was afforded ample notice of the informal hearing which was conducted in Orlando, Florida; there is utterly no showing on this record that this was not a convenient time and place for the subject hearing. Moreover, the appellant was afforded sufficient opportunity to present written evidence at the said hearing; no showing has been made that the commission’s refusal to hold a lengthier hearing so as to allow for extensive oral testimony was an abuse of discretion under the circumstances of this case. See Magnolias Nursing & Convalescent Center v. Department of Health & Rehabilitative Serv., Office of Licensure Certification, 438 So. 2d 421, 424 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983), rev. denied, 449 So. 2d 265 (Fla.1984); Cohen v. Department of Professional Regulation, Bd. of Optometry, 407 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981); § 120.58(l)(a), Fla.Stat. (1985); cf. Florida Dept, of Transp. v. J. W. C. Co., 396 So. 2d 778, 784 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981); United States Serv. Indus. Fla. v. Department of Health & Rehabilitative Serv., 383 So. 2d 728 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980).
Finally, the appellant’s argument that the commission erred in applying sanctions in this case has no merit as it is premised entirely on the non-prejudicial typographical error in the administrative complaint discussed above. The final order under review is therefore in all respects
AFFIRMED.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Brooks v. Dep't of Prof'l Reg., 578 So. 2d 381 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991)…ningful opportunity to present written or oral evidence in opposition to the contemplated action.” Highsmith v. Department of Professional Regulation, 499 So. 2d 19, 20 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986); see also Scharrer v. Department of Professional Regulation, 536 So. 2d 320 (Fla. 3d DCA 1989) (requiring notice of hearing, which must be at a convenient time and place). Although Brooks was in prison at the time of the hearing, there is no indication in the record that the Department complied with section 120.-57(2)(a) or…
Authorities Cited
- Fla. Dep't OF Transp. v. J. W. C. Co., Inc., 396 So. 2d 778 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981)
- Fla. Bd. OF Pharmacy v. Levin, 190 So. 2d 768 (Fla. 1966)
- United States Serv. Industries-Florida v. State of Fla. Dep't OF Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 383 So. 2d 728 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980)
- Ira Jay Cohen v. Dep't of Prof'l Reg., 407 So. 2d 621 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981)
- The Magnolias Nursing & Convalescent Ctr. v. Dep't of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 438 So. 2d 421 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)