DENNIS L. WILLIAMS, APPELLANT,
v.
THE CITY OF MIAMI, 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.
A plaintiff must exhaust administrative remedies before filing a claim under the Florida Whistle-blower's Act.
[1] A plaintiff must exhaust all administrative remedies prior to filing suit under the Florida Whistle-blower's Act.
[2] The Civil Service Board qualifies as the appropriate administrative panel for conducting hearings under the Florida Whistle-blower's Act.
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 intelligenceWilliams filed a complaint under the Florida Whistle-blower's Act after being removed from an auxiliary program, but he failed to first file a grievan…
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 Florida Whistleblower Act cases and more on FLexlaw
Dennis L. Williams seeks to reverse a final summary judgment granted to the City of Miami. We affirm, as Williams failed to exhaust his administrative remedies prior to bringing his claim in circuit court, pursuant to the Florida Whistle-blower’s Act.
Williams retired from the Miami Police Department [“Department”] after twenty five years of service, and continued to serve as a member of the Department’s Auxiliary/Reserve Officer Program. He became aware of a reprimand that had been placed in his file after his retirement, arising from an incident that occurred pri- or to his retirement.1 Williams filed a memo with, and received a response from, the Department’s Disciplinary Review Board. The Department subsequently terminated Williams from the Department’s Auxiliary/Reserve Officer Program. Williams then filed this civil rights Complaint against the City of Miami pursuant to the Florida Whistle-blower’s Act, section 112.3187, Florida Statutes (2009), without first filing his grievance with the Civil Service Board. The City filed a motion for summary judgment, arguing that Williams could not bring his claim under the Florida Whistle-blower’s Act in the circuit court as he had failed to first exhaust his administrative remedies under that statute. The trial court agreed and granted the City’s motion.
Prior to filing suit in circuit court under the Whistle-blower’s Act, a plaintiff must first exhaust all administrative remedies. § 112.3187(8)(b), Fla. Stat. (2009). The Civil Service Board meets the requirement of section 112.3187(8)(b) as the panel before which the administrative hearing must be conducted. Browne v. City of Miami, 948 So.2d 792, 793 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006). Accordingly, pursuant to the Whistle-blower statute, Williams had sixty days from the date the aggrieved act took place to file a complaint with the Miami Civil *93Service Board. See, e.g., City of Miami v. Del Rio, 723 So.2d 299, 301 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998). Williams states in his deposition testimony that he never filed a complaint with the Miami Civil Service Board. As a result, he did not satisfy the prerequisite to filing suit under the Whistle-blower’s Act, and the City of Miami was entitled to summary judgment on those grounds.2,3
Affirmed.4
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
S. Broward Hosp. Dist. v. Kimarie Stratos (Fla. 4th DCA 2023)…e read this provision as creating a mandatory, presuit administrative exhaustion requirement. Bott, 205 So. 3d at 817; Woodford, 270 So. 3d at 484-85; Robinson v. Dep’t of Health, 89 So. 3d 1079, 1081 (Fla. 1st DCA 2012); Williams v. City of Miami, 87 So. 3d 91, 92 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012). The Second District’s Woodford decision is squarely on point. There, a school board employee brought a Whistleblower’s Act claim against the school board, alleging that the board fired the employee in retaliation for compla…
-
Miami-Dade Cnty. v. Harris (Fla. 3d DCA 2019)…187(8)(b), Fla. Stat. (2015), (“The administrative procedure created by ordinance must provide for the complaint to be heard by a panel of impartial persons appointed by the appropriate local governmental authority.”); cf. Williams v. City of Miami, 87 So. 3d 91, 92 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012) (“The Civil Service Board meets the requirement of section 112.3187(8)(b) as the panel before which the administrative hearing must be conducted.). v. City of Miami, 87 So. 3d 91, 92 (Fla. 3d DCA 2012) (“Prior to filing suit…1 / 2
-
Dolch v. Sixth Jud. Cir. Court of Fla. (M.D. Fla. 2025)…s some causal connection between the two events." Rustowicz v. N. Broward Hosp. Dist., 174 So. 3d 414, 419 (Fla. 4th DCA 2015). A plaintiff must first exhaust all administrative remedies before filing a suit under the FWA. Williams v. City of Miami, 87 So. 3d 91, 92 (Fla. ---PAGE 20--- 3d DCA 2012) (citing § 112.3187(8)(b), Fla. Stat.). Though the FWA uses the word “may,” filing a complaint per the methods described in the Act is not an optional pre- suit requirement. Univ. of Cent. Fla. Bd. of Trs. v. Turk…
Authorities Cited
- De Carlo v. Town of W. Miami, 49 So. 2d 596 (Fla. 1950)
- State of Fla. Dep't OF Env't Prot. v. P Z Constr. Co., Inc., 633 So. 2d 76 (Fla. 3d DCA 1994)
- City OF Miami v. DEL RIO, 723 So. 2d 299 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998)
- Browne v. The City OF Miami, 948 So. 2d 792 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006)
- McGregor v. Bd. of Com'rs of Palm Beach Cnty., 674 F. Supp. 858 (S.D. Fla. 1987)