J. A. JONES CONSTRUCTION COMPANY, PETITIONER,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, DEPARTMENT OF GENERAL SERVICES, 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 denied a contractor's petition for writ of prohibition against the Department of General Services' threatened liquidation of security deposits because the petition was premature, lacking the required agency proceedings and order under Florida Administrative Code Section 120.57.
A petition for writ of prohibition is premature when the agency has not yet conducted proceedings under Section 120.57 or issued an order under Section 120.59.
[1] A petition for judicial review of threatened agency action is premature when the agency has not yet conducted proceedings under Section 120.57(1) or (2) or issued a final…
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 intelligenceA building contractor placed interest-bearing certificates of deposit as security and sought to prevent the Department of General Services from liquid…
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 Stay Of Agency Action cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
A building contractor’s petition for writ of prohibition to prevent the Department of General Services from liquidating certain interest-bearing certificates of deposit placed as security by the contractor. The petition for writ of prohibition is treated as a petition for review of agency action determining petitioner’s substantial interests in the interest-bearing certificates of deposit referred to in the petition, and for a stay of agency action pending review. The petition does not exhibit an agency order or otherwise indicate that proceedings under Section 120.57(1) or (2) have been had by the agency leading to such an order, or that such proceedings have been denied. Proceedings complying with Section 120.57 and an order complying with Section 120.59 being essential to any lawful action by the agency, it appears that the petition is premature. See State ex rel. Department of General Services v. Willis, 344 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977), and McDonald v. Department of Banking and Finance, 346 So. 2d 569 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977).
If an order for the threatened action has been or is hereafter entered upon appropriate proceedings, a motion to stay it pending judicial review will be entertained by the agency and, if otherwise denied, will be granted to the extent necessary for this court to entertain a renewed petition for review and a renewed motion to stay.
The petition for review and motion to stay are
DENIED.
SMITH, Acting C. J., and MELVIN and BOOTH, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Capeletti Bros., Inc. v. State, 362 So. 2d 346 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978)…of qualification. General Development Corp. v. Division of State Planning, 353 So. 2d 1199 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); Harris v. Florida Real Est. Comm’n, 358 So. 2d 1123, 1125 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978); J. A. Jones Constr. Co. v. Department of General Services, 356 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978). DOT is likewise impotent to condition Capeletti’s bidding privileges, pending completion of Section 120.57 proceedings, on posting of a bond. DOT’s action is REVERSED. Because we consider that DOT had prior notice of Chapter 12…
-
Comm'n ON Human Relations v. Chris H. Bentley and the Division of Administrative Hearings, 422 So. 2d 964 (Fla. 1st DCA 1982)…ncy action. The order appealed is AFFIRMED. The alternative petition for mandamus is DENIED. McCORD, J., concurs. BOOTH, J., specially concurs, with written opinion. . Cf. J.A. Jones Construction Company v. State, Department of General Services, 356 So. 2d 863, 864 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978) (“Proceedings complying with Section 120.57 and' an order complying with Section 120.59 [are] essential to any lawful action by the agency .... ”); McDonald v. Department of Banking and Finance, 346 So. 2d 569, 583, appeal a…
-
PPI, Inc. v. Fla. Dep't OF Bus. & Prof'l Reg., 917 So. 2d 1020 (Fla. 1st DCA 2006)…or order of the agency, as it applies to the petitioner’s particular set of circumstances.” Thus, the Division has jurisdiction to respond to the Bogdanoff petition for declaratory statement. See J.A. Jones Constr. Co. v. Department of Gen. Servs., 356 So. 2d 863 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978) (denying prohibition relief where the petition did not show that an agency order had been entered); Carneal v. Carneal, 873 So. 2d 562 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004) [*1022] (denying a petition for writ of prohibition where the trial court…
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
- McDONALD v. Dep't OF Banking & Fin., 346 So. 2d 569 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)
- State of Fla. ex rel. Dep't OF Gen. Servs. v. Willis, 344 So. 2d 580 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977)