FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES, WINTER PARK IMPORTS, INC., D/B/A LEXUS OF ORLANDO, FLORIDA AUTOMOBILE DEALERS ASSOCIATION, AND SOUTH FLORIDA AUTO-TRUCK DEALERS ASSOCIATION, INC., APPELLANTS,
v.
JM AUTO, INC., D/B/A JM LEXUS, 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.
The Florida Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles challenged an administrative law judge's determination that Florida Administrative Code rule 15C-7.005, which regulated unauthorized motor vehicle dealerships, was invalid. The appellate court affirmed, holding that the general grant of authority in section 320.011 was insufficient to authorize the rule under Florida's administrative procedure statutes.
The court affirmed the ALJ's determination that the general grant of authority in section 320.011 was insufficient under sections 120.52(8)(b) and 120.536(1), Florida Statutes, to authorize the rule, because an agency may adopt only rules that implement or interpret the specific powers and duties granted by the enabling statute.
[1] An agency may adopt rules only to implement or interpret specific powers and duties granted by the enabling statute.
[2] A general grant of authority to administer and enforce a chapter is insufficient to authorize an agency to adopt rules defining conduct as unauthorized dealership operati…
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 intelligence“only rules that implement or interpret the specific powers and duties granted by the enabling statute”
Establishes the legal standard for valid agency rulemaking under Florida administrative procedure law
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceRule 15C-7.005 purported to regulate 'unauthorized additional motor vehicle dealerships' and 'unauthorized supplemental dealership locations.' The rul…
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 Agency Rulemaking Authority cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellants challenge a final order of the administrative law judge finding Florida Administrative Code rule 15C-7.005 invalid. We affirm.
We review the ALJ’s conclusions of law de novo. See, e.g., Parlato v. Secret Oaks Owners Ass’n, 793 So. 2d 1158, 1162 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001). Rule 15C-7.005 purports to regulate “unauthorized additional motor vehicle dealerships” and “unauthorized supplemental dealership locations,” and identifies section 320.011, Florida Statutes, as the specific authority for its adoption. That law provides, in full: “The Department shall administer and enforce the provisions of this chapter and has authority to adopt rules pursuant to ss. 120.536(1) and 120.54 to implement them.” We agree with the ALJ’s determination that this general grant of authority was insufficient under sections 120.52(8)(b) and 120.536(1), Florida Statutes, which allow an agency to adopt “only rules that implement or interpret the specific powers and duties granted by the enabling statute.”
The ALJ relied on decisions from this court wherein we have recognized the legislature’s intent to restrict the scope of agency rulemaking and consequently have approved a rule only when there is statutory language authorizing the agency to adopt rules to implement the subject matter of the statute. See, e.g., Hanger Prosthetics & Orthotics, Inc. v. Dep’t of Health, 948 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007); Hennessey v. Dep’t of Bus. & Prof'l Regulation, 818 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); Bd. of Trs. of the Internal Improvement Trust Fund v. Day Cruise Ass’n Inc., 794 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001); Sw. Fla. Water Mgmt. Dist. v. Save the Manatee Club, Inc., 773 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000). Consistent with the reasoning of these cases, we find that the broadly worded language of section 320.011 did not authorize the department to enact a rule deeming certain conduct to be the unauthorized establishment of additional or supplemental motor vehicle dealerships. We do not decide any other arguments or issues raised in the parties’ briefs on appeal.
AFFIRMED.
KAHN, PADOVANO, and LEWIS, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Sw. Fla. Water Mgmt. Dist. v. Save THE Manatee Club, Inc., 773 So. 2d 594 (Fla. 1st DCA 2000)
- State v. DAY Cruise Ass'n, Inc., 794 So. 2d 696 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
- Martin and Linda Parlato v. Secret Oaks Owners Ass'n & State of Fla., 793 So. 2d 1158 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001)
- Leger v. State, 818 So. 2d 697 (Fla. 5th DCA 2002)
- Hanger Prosthetics & Orthotics, Inc. v. Dep't of Health, 948 So. 2d 980 (Fla. 1st DCA 2007)