LINDA SIMONELLI, APPELLANT,
v.
DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Competent Substantial Evidence cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
We reverse the award of $2223.40 made to Linda Simonelli by the Construction Industry Licensing Board (“the Board”), which administers the Florida Homeowner’s Construction Recovery Fund (“the Fund”) pursuant to section 489.143, Florida Statutes (2005). The circuit court awarded Simonelli $10,944.20 for damages she incurred when her contractor abandoned construction of her swimming pool. Simonelli then filed a claim with the Board, seeking a payment from the Fund equal to that judgment. The Board, however, took into consideration informal estimates provided by one of its members and concluded that Simonelli should be awarded only $2223.40. This was error. The circuit court’s judgment was competent, substantial evidence before the Board and should have been accepted by the Board as the basis for the award.
We therefore reverse and remand for entry of an award to Ms. Simonelli of the balance of the defaulting contractor’s lifetime cap to the extent it does not exceed the trial court’s judgment.
Reversed and remanded.
DAVIS and WALLACE, JJ., and THREADGILL, EDWARD F„ Senior Judge, Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Demps v. State, 965 So. 2d 1242 (Fla. 4th DCA 2007)…ourt. Therefore, the claim that trial counsel was ineffective in failing to raise the double jeopardy violation, which would have reduced his lowest permissible sentence, has not been conclusively refuted by the record before us. See Brown v. State, 958 So. 2d 1125 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). We reverse the denial of appellant’s motion and remand for attachment of records [*1244] conclusively refuting the allegations or for an evidentiary hearing. FARMER and KLEIN, JJ., concur.…
-
Brown v. State, 1 So. 3d 1231 (Fla. 2d DCA 2009)…ief filed pursuant to Florida Rule of Criminal Procedure 3.850. We reversed the postconviction court’s first summary denial of the motion because the order did not include any attachments to refute Brown’s double jeopardy claims. See Brown v. State, 958 So. 2d 1125, 1126 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007). On remand, the post-conviction court again found no double jeopardy violation and summarily denied the motion, attaching to the order the information and a transcript of the plea colloquy. After reviewing Brown’s motion, th…
-
Mullins v. State, 74 So. 3d 146 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)…trafficking in methamphetamine in violation of section 893.135] when the underlying conduct, i.e., possession, was the same for both offenses.”). If so, the appellant’s claim of ineffective assistance of counsel could have merit. Cf. Brown v. State, 958 So. 2d 1125 (Fla. 2d DCA 2007) (reversing summary denial of claim that counsel was ineffective for failing to object to convictions for two counts of robbery involving only one victim and one episode, where record did not conclusively refute the claim). Accor…