STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL )

REGULATION, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 81-622

)

WILLIAM C. LEISTNER, )

)

Respondent. )

)

RECOMMENDED ORDER

Pursuant to Notice, a formal hearing was held in the above matter before the Division of Administrative Hearings, by its duly designated Hearing Officer, DONALD R. ALEXANDER, on June 3, 1981, in Punta Gorda, Florida.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioner: Charles F. Tunnicliff, Esquire

130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301

For Respondent: William C. Leistner, pro se

741 Sabal Palm Lane

Punta Gorda, Florida 33950 BACKGROUND

By Administrative Compliant dated February 25, 1981, the Petitioner, Department of Professional Regulation, charged that Respondent, William C. Leistner, had violated certain provisions of Chapter 468, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1978), for which disciplinary action should be taken against his registered pool contractor's license. Specifically, it is charged that Respondent, while constructing a pool within the City of Punta Gorda, Florida, was cited for two violations of the city code, and that having failed to make appropriate corrections to the pool, the City then revoked the license of Respondent. It is charged such action against Respondent constitutes a violation of Sections 468.112(2)(a) and (2)(f), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1978), in that Respondent has willfully violated a building code of a city and has had disciplinary action against his license by a municipality.

Respondent disputed the allegations of fact set forth in the Administrative Complaint and requested a formal hearing pursuant to Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes. This matter was transferred to the Division of Administrative Hearings by Petitioner on March 20, 1981, with a request that a Hearing Officer be assigned to conduct a hearing. By Notice of Hearing dated May 5, 1981, the final hearing was scheduled for June 3, 1981, in Punta Gorda, Florida.

At the final hearing, Petitioner and Respondent stipulated that the facts set forth in the Administrative Complaint were true and correct. The only remaining issue is what form of disciplinary action is warranted against Respondent for the violations described in the Administrative Complaint.

Based upon the entire record, the following facts are determined.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. At all times relevant hereto, Respondent, William C. Leistner, was the holder of registered pool contractor's license number RP 0026242 issued by Petitioner, Department of Professional Regulation.

   
   

2. On or about October 20, 1978, Respondent contracted with Mr. and Mrs. Joseph Caiazzo to construct a pool at 700 Coronado Drive, Punta Gorda Isles, Florida. Construction began on November 1, 1978, and Respondent was paid in full on December 8, 1978.

   
   

3. On or about April 14, 1979, and July 13, 1979, the Respondent received two notices of additions or corrections from the City of Punta Gorda for violations of the city code on work relating to the construction of the pool.

   
   

4. Because of Respondent's failure to make the aforesaid additions or corrections, the City of Punta Gorda revoked the license of Respondent on August 13, 1979.

   
   

5. Respondent admitted that the above violations occurred. However, he declined to present any mitigating evidence.

   
   

   CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

   
   

6. The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction of the subject matter and the parties thereto pursuant to Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.

   
   

7. Section 468.112, Florida Statutes (Supp. 1978), sets forth the grounds under which the Department may suspend or revoke a license. As is pertinent here, they include, inter alia.

   
   

   (2)(a) Willful or deliberate disregard and violation of the applicable building codes or laws of the state or any municipality, city, or county thereof.

   
   

   (2)(f) Disciplinary action by any municipality, city, or county, which action shall be reviewed by the state board before the state board takes any disciplinary action.

   
   

8. Respondent acknowledges that the charges are true. Although given an opportunity to do so, he failed to offer any mitigating evidence. Given the nature of the offenses, and the fact that the city has already taken disciplinary action against his license almost 2 years ago, a suspension for a period of six months is appropriate.

RECOMMENDATION

Based upon the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, it is RECOMMENDED that Respondent William C. Leistner, be found guilty of the

charges set forth in the Administrative Complaint and that his license be suspended for a period of six months from the date of the final order entered herein.

DONE and ENTERED this 12th day of June, 1981, in Tallahassee, Florida.

DONALD R. ALEXANDER

Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building

2009 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32301

(904) 488-9675

Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 12th day of June, 1981.

COPIES FURNISHED:

Charles F. Tunnicliff, Esquire

130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Mr. William C. Leistner 741 Sabal Palm Lane

Punta Gorda, Florida 33950

Docket for Case No: 81-000622

Orders for Case No: 81-000622