COASTAL RECOVERY CENTERS, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
EUGENE MATTHEWS, ROBERT ANDERSON, CHARLES RICHARDS, JACK O'NEIL AND DAVID MILLS, AS AND CONSTITUTING THE BOARD OF COUNTY COMMISSIONERS OF SARASOTA COUNTY, FLORIDA, APPELLEES
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 court held that the trial court erred in dismissing the complaint for failure to exhaust administrative remedies, as no adequate remedies were available under the Act.
Coastal Recovery Centers, Inc. sued Sarasota County for failing to pay required matching funds under a state act. Coastal sought a writ of mandamus an…
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 Declaratory Decree cases and more on FLexlaw
THREADGILL, Judge.
Coastal Recovery Centers, Inc., challenges the dismissal of its complaint filed against the Board of County Commissioners of Sarasota County. The complaint sought relief pursuant to chapter 394, part IV, Florida Statutes (1995), known as “The Community Alcohol, Drug Abuse, and Mental Health Services Act.” Under the Act, the state of Florida makes available certain funds to Coastal, a nonprofit corporation. Local participation or matching funds are then required to be budgeted and paid by the county. § 394.76, Fla. Stat. (1995).
Coastal sought a writ of mandamus to compel the county to pay past due matching funds. Coastal also sought a declaratory decree asking the court to declare the formula for computing the amount of matching funds because Coastal and the county were in disagreement about it.
The trial court dismissed the complaint finding that Coastal had failed to exhaust its administrative remedies under the Act. Coastal argues that there are no administrative remedies adequate or available to address the county’s failure to properly calculate and pay the matching funds. We agree and therefore reverse and remand for further proceedings. In doing so, we are not expressly or impliedly approving Coastal’s elected remedy of mandamus.
Reversed.
SCHOONOVER, A.C.J., and PATTERSON, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Winick v. Dep't of Child. & Fam. Servs., 161 So. 3d 464 (Fla. 2d DCA 2014)…Medicaid reimbursement rate determination and requesting monetary relief). Additionally, exhaustion of administrative remedies is not required where none are adequate or available to provide the requested relief. Coastal Recovery Ctrs. v. Matthews, 696 So. 2d 1364, 1364 (Fla. 2d DCA 1997). Mr. Winick seeks monetary relief, continued benefits, which is not available in a rule challenge proceeding. See United Health, 579 So. 2d at 343. Exhaustion of administrative remedies is also not required “where ‘an agenc…