AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION, APPELLANT,
v.
ADA GONZALEZ, M.D., APPELLEE
PER CURIAM.
The order of the Division of Administrative Hearings awarding attorney fees and costs under section 57.111, Florida Statutes, to a medical doctor after the disciplinary action against her was dismissed is REVERSED. The evidence which the hearing officer acknowledged was before the probable cause panel constituted substantial justification for institution of the disciplinary action, but he erroneously determined that this evidence did not constitute substantial justification in light of the Board of Medicine’s subsequent dismissal of the proceeding after more evidence was presented. See Gentele v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Optometry, 513 So. 2d 672 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); see also Department of Professional Regulation, Division of Real Estate v. Toledo Realty, Inc., 549 So. 2d 715 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989).
BARFIELD, KAHN, and DAVIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dep't of Health v. Cralle, 852 So. 2d 930 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)…able cause panel at the time it found probable cause and directed the filing of an administrative complaint.” Fish v. Department of Health, Bd. of Dentistry, 825 So. 2d 421, 423 (Fla 4th DCA 2002); see also Agency for Health Care Admin. v. Gonzalez, 657 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995); Gentele v. Department of Prof'l Regulation, Bd. of Optometry, 513 So. 2d 672 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987); Kibler v. Department of Prof'l Regulation, 418 So. 2d 1081 (Fla. 4th DCA 1982). Contrary to relevant law, the analysis of the ALJ…
-
McCLOSKEY v. Dep't OF Fin. Servs., 172 So. 3d 973 (Fla. 5th DCA 2015)…scoveries do not vitiate the reasonableness of the actions of the [agency] at the time they made their probable cause determinations.” Dep’t of Health v. Cralle, 852 So. 2d 930, 933 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (citing Ag. for Health Care Admin. v. Gonzalez, 657 So. 2d 56 (Fla. 1st DCA 1995)). Moreover, the agency cannot establish substantial justification merely by showing that the action was not frivolous, because- “while governmental action may not be so unfounded as to be frivolous, it may nonetheless be based o…
Authorities Cited
- Gentele v. Dep't OF Prof'l Reg., 513 So. 2d 672 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987)
- Dep't OF Prof'l Reg. v. Toledo Realty, Inc., 549 So. 2d 715 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)
- Stokes v. State, 549 So. 2d 715 (Fla. 1st DCA 1989)