FRANK SCHAFER, APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, 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.
Frank Schafer appeals a final order of the Electrical Contractors' Licensing Board imposing an $8,000 fine for failing to pay a judgment within 18 months. The court affirmed the Board's decision, finding that although the Board erred in its written characterization of Schafer's Election of Rights, the error was harmless because no material facts were in dispute and an informal hearing was therefore permissible.
The Board did not err in proceeding informally because no material facts were in dispute; Florida law permits an agency to proceed informally when material facts are undisputed even if a formal hearing is requested. The scrivener's error in the Board's order was harmless because the undisputed facts fully supported the Board's action.
[1] An agency need not refer a matter to the Department of Administrative Hearings for a formal hearing when material facts are not in dispute, even if a formal hearing is re…
[2] An agency may proceed informally when material facts are undisputed and support the agency's action.
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“When material facts are not in dispute, an agency need not refer a matter to the Department of Administrative Hearings for a formal hearing, even if such a hearing is requested by a party.”
Establishes the legal principle that justifies the Board's decision to proceed informally despite Schafer's request for a formal hearing.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceSchafer, an electrical contractor who was a qualifier for R & R Associates, was charged with violating section 489.533(l)(m)4, Florida Statutes, which…
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 Administrative Agency Procedure cases and more on FLexlaw
WEBSTER, J.
Appellant seeks review of a final order of the Department of Business and Profes sional Regulation, Electrical Contractors’ Licensing Board, imposing a $8,000.00 fine. He contends that the Board erred in denying his request for a formal hearing and adopting the allegations of the administrative complaint. Because it is clear that no material fact was in dispute, and that the undisputed facts support the Board’s action, we affirm.
The challenged order recites that appellant “filed an Election of Rights admitting the facts and requesting an informal hearing.” Appellee correctly concedes that the order is erroneous in that regard and that, although appellant admitted some facts, he disputed others and requested a formal hearing. However, it argues that this scrivener’s error is harmless in this case. We agree.
When material facts are not in dispute, an agency need not refer a matter to the Department of Administrative Hearings for a formal hearing, even if such a hearing is requested by a party. It may, instead, proceed informally. See, e.g., Nicolitz v. Bd. of Opticianry, 609 So. 2d 92, 93-94 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992); Village Saloon, Inc. v. Div. of Alcoholic Beverages & Tobacco, Dep’t of Bus. Regulation, 463 So. 2d 278, 285 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (on denial of rehearing). Appellant was charged with a violation of section 489.533(l)(m)4, Florida Statutes (2001), which authorizes the imposition of a fine when an electrical contractor “fails, within 18 months, to pay or comply with ... a judgment obtained against the contractor or a business qualified by the contractor and relating to the practice of [electrical] contracting.” Appellant admitted that a money judgment had been entered against R & R Associates, and that he had been the qualifier for that entity. Moreover, he did not dispute the facts that the judgment had remained unpaid for more than 18 months and that it related to the practice of electrical contracting. No additional facts were necessary to establish the violation with which appellant was charged. Accordingly, the Board was free to proceed informally, and to enter the challenged order. Appellant makes additional arguments which are without merit. The final order of the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Electrical Contractors’ Licensing Board, is affirmed.
AFFIRMED.
ALLEN, C.J., and BROWNING, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Meller v. Fla. Real Est. Comm'n, 902 So. 2d 325 (Fla. 5th DCA 2005)…he matter be handled by informal proceeding.’ ” Weiss, 677 So. 2d at 99 (quoting Village Saloon, Inc. v. Division of Alcoholic Beverages & Tobacco, 463 So. 2d 278, 285 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)); see also Schafer v. Department of Bus. & Prof'l Regulation, 844 So. 2d 757, 758 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003) (“When material facts are not in dispute, an agency need not refer a matter to the Department of Administrative Hearings for a formal hearing, even if such a hearing is requested by a party. It may, instead, proceed informal…
-
Gonzalez v. Dep't of Bus. & Prof'l Reg., 958 So. 2d 494 (Fla. 3d DCA 2007)…120.57(1), Florida Statutes (2005).2 Although the Board erred in that respect, their findings are affirmed as there were no material facts in dispute requiring the Board to conduct a formal hearing. See Schafer v. Dep't of Bus. & Prof'l Regulation, 844 So. 2d 757, 758 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)(finding that the Board’s erroneous statement m its final order that the appellant requested an informal, rather than a formal hearing, was harmless because the absence of a disputed material fact allowed the Board to proceed…
-
Burnett Int'l Coll. v. State of Fla. Bd. of Nursing, 316 So. 3d 763 (Fla. 1st DCA 2021)…ed issues of material fact, the agency need not refer the matter for a formal hearing, even if a party requests one, and may proceed with an informal hearing under section 120.57(2), Florida Statutes. See Schafer v. Dep’t of Bus & Prof’l Regulation, 844 So. 2d 757, 758 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003); Vill. Saloon, Inc. v. Div. of Alcoholic Beverages & Tobacco, Dep’t of Bus. Regulation, 463 So. 2d 278, 285 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). Here, Burnett argues that the passage rates submitted by the Board created a disputed issue of…
Previewing 3 of 6 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Vill. Saloon, Inc. v. Division OF Alcoholic Beverages AND Tobacco, 463 So. 2d 278 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984)
- Nicolitz v. Bd. OF Opticianry & Dep't of Prof'l Reg., 609 So. 2d 92 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992)