L.G.H., APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILY SERVICES, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Hearsay Evidence In Administrative Proceedings cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
This cause is before us on appeal from an order of Appellee reversing, as based on hearsay, the order of the administrative law judge (ALJ). We reverse.
Hearsay is admissible in administrative proceedings, but “hearsay alone does not constitute competent, substantial evidence.” Forehand v. School Board of Gulf County, 600 So. 2d 1187, 1191 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). Due to the nature of the proceedings below, arising from allegations of financial exploitation1 and dealing with the intent in authorizing Appellant to make various transfers of funds, much of the evidence offered was hearsay. Review of the record, however, shows that the determination of the ALJ was not based on hearsay alone, but was supported by direct evidence. § 120.57(l)(c), Fla. Stat. Accordingly, we reverse and remand to the Department for entry of an order in accordance with the recommendation of the ALJ that Appellant’s name be expunged from the abuse registry.
REVERSED and REMANDED.
BOOTH and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., CONCUR. BENTON, J., CONCURS IN RESULT ONLY.
. § 415.102(14)(a)-(b), Fla. Stat.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Strickland v. Fla. A & M Univ., 799 So. 2d 276 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)…fact-finding discretion). In addition, although hearsay is admissible in administrative proceedings, determinations of the Administrative Law Judge may not be based on hearsay alone. See § 120.57(1)(c); L.G.H. v. Dep’t of Children and Family Serv., 735 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999). In this proceeding, where the allegation of sexual harassment is ultimately a question of fact, Appellee rejécted essentially all of the principal findings of fact and ultimate findings included in the conclusions of law in the…
-
Enterprises-Florida v. Agency for Health Care Admin., 745 So. 2d 1133 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999)…ith 33 years experience, who specifically testified as to why the pressure sores found on the Emerald Oak patients were avoidable. Thus, competent, substantial evidence supports the ALJ’s findings. L.G.H. v. Department of Children and Family Servs., 735 So. 2d 548 (Fla. 1st DCA 1999); Manasota Osteopathic Gen. Hosp., Inc. v. State, Department of Health and Rehabilitative Servs., 523 So. 2d 710 (Fla. 1st DCA 1988). Accordingly, the order under review is AFFIRMED. BOOTH AND PADOYANO, JJ., CONCUR.…
Authorities Cited
- Forehand v. Sch. Bd. OF Gulf Cnty., 600 So. 2d 1187 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)