DONALD JUHL, PETITIONER,
v.
FLORIDA STATE BOARD OF DISPENSING OPTICIANS, 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.
A dispensing optician challenged a six-month license suspension imposed by the Florida State Board of Dispensing Opticians for advertising eye examination services, which opticians are statutorily prohibited from providing. The appellate court granted the writ of certiorari and reduced the suspension to 30 days, finding the original penalty an abuse of discretion.
The Board abused its discretion. Although the advertisement violated Florida Statutes Chapter 484 and Opticians Rules Chapter 21P-1 on its face, a six-month suspension was unwarranted and would cause undue economic hardship. The suspension was modified to 30 days.
[1] A dispensing optician violates Florida law by advertising or offering eye examinations, which are the exclusive province of optometrists.
[2] A six-month suspension of a dispensing optician's license may constitute an abuse of discretion if it results in undue economic hardship.
Previewing 2 of 3 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 basic violation of Florida Statutes Chapter 484 and Opticians Rules Chapter 21P-1 appears to be that the petitioner in its communication to the union members advised that complete optical services, including eye examinations, would be furnished. Opticians by statute are restricted from eye examinations as this is a function of an optometrist.”
Establishes that the advertisement violated the statute and rules prohibiting opticians from performing eye examinations
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDonald Juhl, a dispensing optician, authorized a letter to United Transportation Union members advertising complete optical services including eye exa…
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 Writ Of Certiorari cases and more on FLexlaw
Petitioner seeks a writ of certiorari to review a ruling of the Florida State Board of Dispensing Opticians finding him guilty of violations of Florida Chapter 484 and Opticians Rules Chapter 21P-1. The basis for the charges arose out of a letter1 addressed to all members of the United Transportation Union, State of Florida, *597and signed by one L. C. Rogge. The letter advised the members of a complete optical service, including eye examinations, at a reduced cost to them and their dependents upon presentation of the card attached thereto at any of petitioner’s five business addresses printed on the reverse side of the letter. A hearing was held before the Board on February 19, 1972 at which time the Board found petitioner guilty of three out of four counts and suspended his license to practice the trade or occupation of dispensing optician for a period of six months.
The basic violation of Florida Statutes Chapter 484 and Opticians Rules Chapter 21P-1 appears to be that the petitioner in its communication to the union members advised that complete optical services, including eye examinations, would be furnished. Opticians by statute are restricted from eye examinations as this is a function of an optometrist. See F.S. § 484.02 F.S.A. and Opticians Rules 21 P-1.02. Therefore, the communication on its face violated the statute and related rule and petitioner offered little or no testimony at the time of the hearing before the Board on this point.
We feel the Board has abused its discretion in that the six month suspension is not warranted under the circumstances and would result in an undue economic hardship to the petitioner and, therefore, the order of the Board should be modified.
Accordingly, the writ of certiorari is granted and the order is modified to read as follows: the licensee, Donald Juhl as owner and/or officer of Community Optical Service f/k/a Family Optical Service is hereby suspended from the practice of dispensing optician for a period of thirty (30) days from the date of the service of copy of this order.
In all other particulars, the order of the Florida State Board of Dispensing Opticians shall remain in full force and effect.
It is so ordered.