DWIGHT D. ELLINWOOD, APPELLANT,
v.
BOARD OF ARCHITECTURE AND INTERIOR DESIGN, 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.
Dwight Ellinwood appealed the Board of Architecture and Interior Design's denial of his architect license application. The court reversed, finding the Board's interpretation of the statute's five-year degree requirement was clearly erroneous and that the requirement applied only to one of three alternative pathways to licensure.
The five-year degree requirement applies only to paragraph (c) of section 481.213(3) and not to paragraph (b). Ellinwood qualifies for licensure under paragraph (b), which does not impose a five-year degree requirement and instead requires only that the applicant hold a valid license from another jurisdiction with substantially equivalent criteria.
[1] An agency's interpretation of a statute it administers may be overturned if it is clearly erroneous.
[2] The plain meaning of an unambiguous statute must be given effect.
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“The Board's application of the five-year degree requirement to both paragraph (b) and (c) is clearly erroneous. Section 481.213(3) is unambiguous and must be given its plain meaning.”
Establishes the standard of review and the court's interpretation methodology for statutory construction.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceEllinwood holds a bachelor of design in architecture from the University of Florida (1977) and has been licensed as an architect in Georgia since 1986…
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 Licensure By Endorsement cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Dwight Ellinwood appeals the denial of his application for an architect’s license under section 481.213(3), Florida Statutes. He contends that the Board of Architecture and Interior Design’s interpretation of the statute is clearly erroneous. We agree and reverse.
Ellinwood received a bachelor of design in architecture from the University of Florida in 1977. He has been a licensed architect in Georgia since 1986, and also is licensed in Virginia and Pennsylvania. In March 2000, Ellinwood applied for a Florida license, seeking licensure by endorsement pursuant to section 481.213(3), Florida Statutes. Section 481.213(3) states:
The board shall certify as qualified for a license by endorsement as an architect or as an interior designer an applicant who:
(a) Qualifies to take the prescribed li-censure examination, and has passed the prescribed licensure examination or a substantially equivalent examination in another jurisdiction, as set forth in s. 481.209 for architects or interior design ers, as applicable, and has satisfied the internship requirements set forth in s. 481.211 for architects;
(b) Holds a valid license to practice architecture or interior design issued by another jurisdiction of the United States, if the criteria for issuance of such license were substantially equivalent to the licensure criteria that existed in this state at the time the license was issued; provided, however, that an applicant who has been licensed for use of the title “interior design” rather than licensed to practice interior design shall not qualify hereunder; or (c) Has passed the prescribed licensure examination and holds a valid certificate issued by the National Council of Architectural Registration Boards, and holds a valid license to practice architecture issued by another state or jurisdiction of the United States. For the purposes of this paragraph, any applicant licensed in another state or jurisdiction after June 30, 1984, must also hold a degree in architecture and such degree must be equivalent to that required in s. 481.209(l)(b). Also for the purposes of this paragraph, any applicant licensed in another state or jurisdiction after June 30,1985, must have completed an internship equivalent to that required by s. 481.211 and any rules adopted with respect thereto.
(emphasis added).
Section 481.209(l)(b) states that an applicant must have degree from a school or college accredited by the National Architectural Accreditation Board, which effectively requires an applicant to have a five-year degree in architecture. Under the Board’s interpretation of section 481.213(3), the five-year degree requirement applies to paragraphs (b) and (c). Since Ellinwood’s degree is a four-year degree, the Board denied his application.
At an informal hearing before the Board, Ellinwood argued that the five-year degree requirement applied only to paragraph (c) and not to paragraph (b), and that under paragraph (b), he was entitled to licensure. The Board rejected this argument and upheld its denial of Ellin-wood’s application.
Although an agency’s interpretation of a statute it administers is entitled to deference, this court can overturn the agency’s interpretation if it is clearly erroneous. See Ocampo v. Dep’t of Health, 806 So. 2d 633, 634 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002). The Board’s application of the five-year degree requirement to both paragraph (b) and (c) is clearly erroneous. Section 481.213(3) is unambiguous and must be given its plain meaning. See Holly v. Auld, 450 So. 2d 217, 219 (Fla.1984). The five-year degree requirement is contained in paragraph (c) which specifically states that the requirement applies to “this paragraph.” Moreover, paragraph (b) is separated from paragraph (c) with the disjunctive “or.” The use of a disjunctive in a statute indicates alternatives and requires that those alternatives be treated separately. See Kirksey v. State, 433 So. 2d 1236, 1241 n. 2 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983). Based on these circumstances, the five-year degree requirement plainly applies only to paragraph (c). Therefore, we reverse the Board’s denial of Ellinwood’s application and remand for reconsideration of the application under section 481.213(3)(b), Florida Statutes.
ALLEN, C.J., WEBSTER and PADOVANO, JJ., CONCUR.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
L. Julio Reinstein, M.D. v. Pediatric Gastroenterology, Hepatology & Nutrition OF Fla., P.A., 25 So. 3d 54 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)…ccordingly, he argues, the circuit court properly dismissed him as a party to the litigation. We disagree. The use of a word in the disjunctive means only that alternative means are expressed. See Ellinwood v. Bd. of Architecture & Interior Design, 835 So. 2d 1269, 1270 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003); D.M. v. State, 712 So. 2d 1204, 1204 (Fla. 5th DCA 1998) (“The word ‘or’ is generally construed in the disjunctive when used in a statute or rule, and normally means that alternatives were intended.”). But the expression o…
-
Ellinwood v. State, 889 So. 2d 1006 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004)…a Florida architectural license by endorsement under section 481.213(3)(b), Florida Statutes (1999). Previously, after the Board denied his application, appellant sought review in this court. See Ellinwood, v. Bd. of Architecture & Interior Design, 835 So. 2d 1269 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). This court reversed the Board’s denial and remanded the case for further proceedings on the basis that only subsection (3)(c) of the statute has an explicit requirement that an architect licensed out of state demonstrate that he…
Authorities Cited
- Eugene Holly, M.D. v. Albert W. Auld, M.D., 450 So. 2d 217 (Fla. 1984)
- Kirksey v. State, 433 So. 2d 1236 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983)
- State v. Robinson, 806 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)
- Benjamin Paz Ocampo, M.D. v. Dep't OF Health, 806 So. 2d 633 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)