JAMES M. MCMILLAN, APPELLANT,
v.
BROWARD COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD, 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.
A high school baseball coach appeals the Broward County School Board's rejection of an administrative law judge's finding that he did not know of or condone hazing during a school trip. The court reverses, holding that the School Board improperly rejected a factual finding as a conclusion of law and was bound by the ALJ's determination that the coach lacked knowledge of the hazing.
The School Board improperly rejected the ALJ's finding of fact by characterizing it as a conclusion of law. An administrative agency may only reject a hearing officer's findings of fact if they are not based on competent, substantial evidence or if the proceedings failed to comply with essential requirements of law. The court found competent, substantial evidence supported the ALJ's finding that McMillan lacked knowledge of the hazing.
[1] An administrative agency may not reject a hearing officer's findings of fact unless it first determines that they were not based on competent, substantial evidence or tha…
[2] An agency's responsibility to determine if substantial evidence supports a hearing officer's conclusions cannot be avoided by merely labeling contrary findings as conclus…
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“An administrative agency may not reject a hearing officer's findings of fact, unless it first determines that they were not based on competent, substantial evidence, or that the proceedings before the hearing officer did not comply with the essential requirements of law.”
Establishes the legal standard governing when an administrative agency may reject an ALJ's findings of fact.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceJames McMillan was a high school baseball coach supervising the school's baseball team during a trip to Orlando. The School Board filed an administrat…
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 Findings Of Fact And Conclusions Of Law cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
James McMillan timely appeals from a final order of the Broward County School Board that rejected the recommended order of the administrative law judge finding that McMillan was not subject to discipline for immorality, misconduct in office and incompetency. McMillan is a high school baseball coach. The School Board filed an administrative complaint alleging that McMillan was aware of and condoned hazing while supervising the school’s baseball team during a trip to Orlando. After an evidentiary hearing, the administrative law judge made extensive findings of fact and concluded in paragraph forty-two that the evidence did “not establish that [McMillan] knew or had reason to know that hazing was about to occur or that hazing had occurred.” The School Board rejected this finding, characterizing paragraph forty-two as a conclusion of law. The School Board then proceeded to discipline McMillan because the hazing occurred “while under Respondent’s watch” on the trip to Orlando.
We agree with appellant that the quoted portion of paragraph forty-two is a finding of fact. An administrative agency may not reject a hearing officer’s findings of fact, unless it first determines that they were not based on competent, substantial evidence, or that the proceedings before the hearing officer did not comply with the essential requirements of law. See § 120.57(l)(i), Fla. Stat. (2001); Greseth v. Dep’t of Health & Rehabilitative Servs., 573 So. 2d 1004, 1006 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991). An “agency’s responsibility to determine if substantial evidence supports the hearing officer’s conclusions cannot be avoided by merely labeling contrary findings as ‘conclusions of law.’ ” Greseth, 573 So. 2d at 1006. The School Board was bound by the hearing officer’s finding that the evidence did not establish that McMillan “knew or had reason to know that hazing was about to occur or that hazing had occurred.” There was “competent, substantial evidence” to support the finding. Therefore, McMillan could not be subject to discipline for the hazing itself.
We remand to the agency for further proceedings. If McMillan is subject to any discipline at all, it is based on his response to the situation after the child complainant told him on the Monday evening of the trip about the hazing.
REVERSED AND REMANDED.
STONE, WARNER and GROSS, JJ„ concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Packer v. Orange Cnty. Sch. Bd., 881 So. 2d 1204 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)…icer’s findings, unless it first determines that they were not based on competent, substantial evidence, or that the proceedings before the hearing officer did not comply with the essential requirements of law. McMillan v. Broward County School Bd., 834 So. 2d 903 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); see also Gross v. Department of Health, 819 So. 2d 997 (Fla. [*1207] 5th DCA 2002). Furthermore, when determining whether to reject or modify the findings of fact in a recommended order, the agency is not permitted to weigh the…
-
Puig v. Fla. Eng'rs Mgmt. Corp., 939 So. 2d 1146 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)…not be rejected by an administrative agency. Packer v. Orange County School Bd., 881 So. 2d 1204 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). Nor may the agency avoid this responsibility by labeling the findings as conclusions of law. McMillan v. Broward County School Bd., 834 So. 2d 903 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003). Here, FEMC objected to the finding that Puig did not intend to assist Naranjo in the unlicensed practice of engineering deeming this to be a conclusion of law not sup [*1148] ported by the language of Sections 471.033 and 455.22…
-
Amador v. The Sch. Bd. OF Monroe Cnty., 225 So. 3d 853 (Fla. 3d DCA 2017)…icer’s findings unless it first determines that they were not based on competent, substantial evidence, or that the proceedings before the hearing officer did not comply with the essential requirements of law. See McMillan v, Broward Cnty. Sch. Bd., 834 So. 2d 903 (Fla. 4th DCA 2003); Gross v. Dep’t of Health, 819 So. 2d 997 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002). Furthermore, when determining whether to reject or modify the findings of fact in a recommended order, the agency is not permitted to weigh the evidence, judge the cr…
Authorities Cited
- Horton v. State, 573 So. 2d 1004 (Fla. 4th DCA 1991)