JEREMIAH J. WALKER, P.E., APPELLANT,
v.
BOARD OF PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERS, 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.
Jeremiah Walker appeals the Board of Professional Engineers' rejection of an Administrative Law Judge's findings and conclusion that negligence was not proven. The Florida appellate court reverses, holding that the Board improperly rejected factual findings supported by competent substantial evidence and substituted its own conclusions without legal authority to do so.
The Board improperly rejected the ALJ's findings of fact and substituted its own conclusions. When competent substantial evidence supports an ALJ's findings of fact, the agency may not reject, modify, or substitute its own findings. The ALJ's recommended order must be adopted as the final order.
[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] When determining whether to reject or modify the findings of fact in a recommended order, an agency is not permitted to reweigh the evidence, judge the credibility of wit…
Previewing 2 of 6 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 agency may not reject the hearing officer's finding unless there is no competent, substantial evidence from which the finding could reasonably be inferred. The agency is not authorized to weigh the evidence presented, judge credibility of witnesses, or otherwise interpret the evidence to fit its desired ultimate conclusion.”
Establishes the standard for when an administrative agency may overturn 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 intelligenceWalker, a professional engineer, was subject to disciplinary proceedings before the Board of Professional Engineers. An Administrative Law Judge condu…
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 Appeal cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Jeremiah J. Walker, P.E., appeals a final order of the Board of Professional Engineers (Board), appellee, which rejects various findings of fact made in the recommended order of the Administrative Law Judge (ALJ), rejects the ALJ’s conclusion that negligence was not proven, and substitutes the Board’s conclusion that negligence had been proven justifying a reprimand of Walker’s license.1 Because competent substantial evidence supports the findings of the ALJ, we reverse.
As this court explained in Heifetz v. Department of Business Regulation, 475 So. 2d 1277, 1281 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985) (citations omitted and emphasis added):
Factual issues susceptible of ordinary methods of proof that are not infused with policy considerations are the prerogative of the hearing officer as the finder of fact. It is the hearing officer’s function to consider all the evidence presented, resolve conflicts, judge credibility of witnesses, draw permissible inferences from the evidence, and reach ultimate findings of fact based on competent, substantial evidence. If as is often the case, the evidence presented supports two inconsistent findings, it is the hearing officer’s role to decide the issue one way or the other. The agency may not reject the hearing officer’s finding unless there is no competent, substantial evidence from which the finding could reasonably be inferred. The agency is not authorized to weigh the evidence presented, judge credibility of witnesses, or otherwise interpret the evidence to fit its desired ultimate conclusion.
Accord Packer v. Orange County School Bd., 881 So. 2d 1204, 1207 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004); Tedder v. Florida Parole Comm’n, 842 So. 2d 1022, 1025 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003). Here, competent substantial evidence supports the findings of fact made by the ALJ. Florida courts are in agreement that when competent substantial evidence in the record supports the ALJ’s findings of fact, “the agency may not reject them, modify them, substitute its. findings, or make new findings.” Gross v. Dep’t of Health, 819 So. 2d 997, 1001 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002).
REVERSED and REMANDED with instructions that the ALJ’s recommended order be adopted as the final order of the Board.
WEBSTER, VAN NORTWICK, and PADOVANO, JJ., concur. . In its final order, the Board approved certain exceptions to the recommended order filed by Florida Engineers Management Corporation (FEMC). See section 471.038(3)(b), Florida Statutes (2005), providing that FEMC shall provide prosecutorial services to the Board. In addition to its exceptions, FEMC also provided the Board with certain documents that were not part of the record and were not considered by the ALJ. On appeal, the Board correctly concedes that it was improper for it to have considered evidence outside of the record. See Hodge v. Dep’t of Prof'l Regulation, 432 So. 2d 117, 118 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983).
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Kanter Real Est., LLC v. Dep't of Env't Prot., 267 So. 3d 483 (Fla. 1st DCA 2019)…” Abrams v. Seminole Cty. Sch. Bd., 73 So. 3d 285, 294 (Fla. 5th DCA 2011). 7 Moreover, an agency is not permitted to consider evidence outside the record when reviewing exceptions to a recommended order. Walker v. Bd. of Prof’l Engineers, 946 So. 2d 604, 605 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006). In addition, an agency “may not base agency action that determines the substantial interests of a party on an unadopted rule . . . .” § 120.57(1)(e)1., Fla. Stat. (2018). This “does not preclude application of valid…
-
Avalons Assisted Living, LLC v. Agency for Health Care Admin., 80 So. 3d 347 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)…rs. Cf. DeGroot v. Sheffield, 95 So. 2d 912, 916 (Fla.1957) (describing “substantial evidence” as “such evidence as will establish a substantial basis of fact from which the fact at issue can be reasonably inferred”); Walker v. Bd. of Prof'l Eng’rs, 946 So. 2d 604 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006); Strickland v. Fla. A & M Univ., 799 So. 2d 276, 278-79 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (stating that if the hearing officer’s factual findings and reasonable inferences drawn therefrom are supported by competent substantial evidence, it is…
-
Hamilton Downs Horsetrack, LLC v. State, 226 So. 3d 1046 (Fla. 1st DCA 2017)…he essential requirements of law. “When competent substantial evidence in the record supports the ALJ’s findings of fact, ‘the agency may not reject them, modify them, substitute its findings, or make new findings.’ ” Walker v. Bd. of Prof'l Eng’rs, 946 So. 2d 604, 605 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006) (quoting Gross v. Dep’t of Health, 819 So. 2d 997, 1001 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)). “Credibility of the witnesses is a matter that is within the province of the [ALJ], as is the weight to be given the evidence.” Stinson v. Winn, 9…
Previewing 3 of 4 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Mel Heifetz v. Dep't of Bus. Reg., 475 So. 2d 1277 (Fla. 1st DCA 1985)
- Tedder v. Fla. Parole Comm'n, 842 So. 2d 1022 (Fla. 1st DCA 2003)
- Howard E. Gross, M.D. v. Dep't OF Health, 819 So. 2d 997 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)
- Maurice Hodge, M.D. v. Dep't OF Prof'l Reg. OF the State OF Fla., 432 So. 2d 117 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983)
- Packer v. Orange Cnty. Sch. Bd., 881 So. 2d 1204 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004)