STUDENTS FOR ONLINE VOTING, THOMAS F. JARDON, SAM A. MIORELLI, KYLE HUEY, AND MARK MCSHERA, JR., PETITIONERS,
v.
BERNARD MACHEN, AS PRESIDENT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA AND AGENT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA BOARD OF TRUSTEES, RESPONDENT
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.
The court granted a petition for writ of mandamus requiring the University of Florida to properly render and file a final administrative order with the agency clerk, as required by the Administrative Procedure Act.
An agency subject to the Administrative Procedure Act must properly render a final order by filing it with the clerk, and failure to do so is a violation of statutory duty that can be remedied by mandamus.
[1] An agency subject to the Administrative Procedure Act must comply with its statutory duty to render a final order by filing it with the agency clerk, and this ministerial…
Previewing 1 of 1 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe University of Florida, an agency subject to the Administrative Procedure Act, issued a final order on February 22, 2008, but refused to properly r…
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 Statutory Duty cases and more on FLexlaw
Respondent, an agency of the State of Florida subject to the Administrative Procedure Act, issued a final order but refuses to properly render it by filing it with the clerk. See § 120.52(7), Fla. Stat. (2009); Bank of Port St. Joe v. State, Dep’t of Banking and Fin., 362 So.2d 96 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). The petitioners’ appeal from that order was previously dismissed because the order had not been rendered. Students for Online Voting v. Student Gov’t of the Student Body of the Univ. of Fla., 10 So.3d 709 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009). Having considered the petition for writ of mandamus and the response thereto, we find that petitioners are entitled to relief. See Tucker v. Ruvin, 748 So.2d 376 (Fla. 3d DCA 2000). Respondent argues in op*1274position to the petition that the petitioners lacked standing to obtain relief from the agency and that the individual who issued the order did not have authority to grant the relief sought. These are issues to be resolved in the appeal and do not justify respondent’s failure to perform its statutory duty to render the order. We therefore grant the petition and direct respondent to properly render the final order of February 22, 2008, by filing it with the agency clerk. The respondent shall also provide copies of that order to the petitioners, with indication of the date of filing, within 10 days of issuance of our mandate in this cause.
PETITION GRANTED.
BARFIELD, WOLF, and LEWIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Johnston v. Fla. Unemployment Appeals Comm'n, 71 So. 3d 230 (Fla. 1st DCA 2011)…ant’s petition to vacate the 2008 final order has not been rendered by the agency. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.020(h). Therefore, the appeal from the September 20, 2010, administrative order is premature. See generally Students for Online Voting v. Machen, 24 So. 3d 1273 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (noting earlier appeal had been dismissed as premature because it had not been rendered). This dismissal is without prejudice to the appellant’s right to seek relief from the lower tribunal or to bring a timely appeal once the ag…
-
Sowell v. State OF Fla. Dep't OF Revenue In re the Matter of Certain Decisions of the 2012 Bay Cnty. Value Adjustment Bd., 122 So. 3d 996 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013)…nd related expense, is available to the property appraiser to contest the Department’s position that its probable cause review is an agency investigation and not a final agency action subject to judicial review. Students for Online Voting v. Machen, 24 So. 3d 1273, 1274 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (granting [*997] mandamus due to university’s “failure to perform its statutory duty to render the order.”). Whatever economic efficiency that might be gained in this case by resolving this issue now is outweighed by muddyi…
-
Fla. A & M Univ. Bd. OF Trs. v. Bruno, 198 So. 3d 1040 (Fla. 1st DCA 2016)…. There is no further action that remains to be taken by the university’s administration and, thus, for'purposes of section 1004.26(5), the Student Supreme Court’s decision was “made final” by the university. Cf Students for Online Voting v. Machen, 24 So. 3d 1273 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009) (granting petition for writ of mandamus and directing university president to render a final order with respect to a student group’s challenge to a decision made by the university’s student government). ■ However, Bruno did not…
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
- Crumbley v. Crumbley, 362 So. 2d 96 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)
- Powell v. Allen, 748 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 5th DCA 2000)
- Nixon v. State, 748 So. 2d 376 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
- Students FOR Online Voting v. Student Gov't OF the Student Body OF the Univ. OF Fla., 10 So. 3d 709 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)
- Fayson v. State, 10 So. 3d 709 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009)