ST. PETERSBURG KENNEL CLUB, APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF PARI-MUTUEL WAGERING, 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 St. Petersburg Kennel Club appealed the Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering's denial of approval for three card games at its card room. The court affirmed the denial, holding that the conformity of games to statutory requirements can be determined in a contested proceeding even without the previously invalidated administrative rule.
The law of the case doctrine does not bar the Division's final order. The conformity of games with statutory requirements under Section 849.085(2)(a) and Section 849.086, Florida Statutes, can be determined in a contested proceeding without the invalidated rule. The Division had sufficient, competent evidence upon which to base its decision to deny approval.
[1] The law of the case doctrine applies to issues that were actually considered and decided on a former appeal involving the same action.
[2] A governmental agency's final order can be affirmed if the administrative law judge and the agency had sufficient, competent evidence upon which to make a decision.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“All card games in Hoyle's Modern Encyclopedia of Card Games, by Walter B. Gibson, published by Doubleday and Company, Inc., April 1974 1st Edition hereinafter (Hoyle's) incorporated herein by reference, that are authorized by and played in a manner consistent with Section 849.085(2)(a) and Section 849.086, Florida Statutes, and the rules promulgated thereunder, shall be approved by the division.”
Establishes the statutory standard for automatic approval of card games listed in Hoyle's Encyclopedia
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe St. Petersburg Kennel Club sought approval to play three card games at its licensed card-room facility. The Division initially denied approval bas…
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 Invalid Exercise Of Delegated Legislative Authority cases and more on FLexlaw
GREEN, Judge.
The St. Petersburg Kennel Club (the Kennel Club) timely appeals the final order of the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Division of PariMutuel Wagering (Division) denying approval of three card games that the Kennel Club sought to play at its licensed card-room facility. We affirm.
The Kennel Club contends that the Division’s final order on remand merely adopts identical findings and conclusions of law which were considered and rejected by this court in the case of Si Petersburg Kennel Club v. Department of Business & Professional Regulation, Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering, 719 So. 2d 1210 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998), and is barred by the law of the case doctrine. We disagree.
The previous order on appeal was founded on Florida Administration Code Rule 61d-11.026, which we held to be an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority. We further reversed the order denying approval of the card games because it was based on an invalid rule. Florida Administrative Code Rule 61d-11.002(2)(a) provides:
(2)(a) All card games in Hoyle's Modern Encyclopedia of Card Games, by Walter B. Gibson, published by Doubleday and Company, Inc., April 1974 1st Edition hereinafter (Hoyle’s) incorporated herein by reference, that are authorized by and played in a manner consistent with Section 849.085(2)(a) and Section 849.086, Florida Statutes, and the rules promulgated thereunder, shall be approved by the division. All other card games shall be approved by the division if the type of card games and the rules of the card games, as specified in BPR Form 16-001, meet the requirements of Section 849.085(2)(a) and Section 849.086, Florida Statutes, and the rules promulgated thereunder.
We hold that the conformity of games specified under section 849.085(2)(a), Florida Statutes (Supp.1996), can be determined in a contested proceeding without consideration of the disavowed rule. See Two M. Dev. Corp. v. Mikos, 578 So. 2d 829 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991) (holding doctrine of the law of the case applies to issues that were actually considered and decided on former appeal involving same action). A review of the entire record in this appeal supports the conclusion that the administrative law judge and the Division had before it sufficient, competent evidence upon which to make a decision.
Therefore, the Division’s final order is affirmed.
NORTHCUTT, A.C.J., and DAVIS, J., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Dep't of Bus. & Prof'l Reg. v. Dania Ent. Ctr., LLC, 229 So. 3d 1259 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)…t “conformity of games specified under section 849.085(2)(a) ... can be determined in a contested proceeding without consideration of the disavowed rule.” St. Petersburg Kennel Club v. Dep’t of Bus. & Prof'l Regulation, Div. of Pari-Mutuel Wagering, 757 So. 2d 1240, 1241 (Fla. 2d DCA 2000). Here, the ALJ’s reliance on St. Petersburg Kennel Club, 719 So. 2d 1210, was misplaced because that case is factually distinguishable.3 Unlike “poker,” the term “designated player game” does not denote a specific card game…
Authorities Cited
- TWO M Dev. Corp. v. Mikos, 578 So. 2d 829 (Fla. 2d DCA 1991)
- ST. Petersburg Kennel Club v. Dep't of Bus. & Prof'l Reg., 719 So. 2d 1210 (Fla. 2d DCA 1998)