Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT SECURITY vs. DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, 84-000845 (1984)

Court: Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 84-000845 Visitors: 10
Judges: ROBERT T. BENTON, II
Agency: Agency for Workforce Innovation
Latest Update: Aug. 27, 1984
Summary: Whether petitioner should recover $735 allegedly disbursed by respondent under Contract 3-14.073-051 to one Kenneth L. Jenks?Petitioner should abandon efforts to recoup monies paid.
84-0845

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND )

EMPLOYMENT SECURITY, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 84-0845

)

DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION, )

)

Respondent. )

)


RECOMMENDED ORDER


This matter came on for hearing in Tallahassee, Florida, before the Division of Administrative Hearings by its duly designated Hearing Officer, Robert T. Benton, II, on June 6, 1984. Mr. Harlan Ard, who is employed by respondent, Department of Education, was present for the proceedings, but did not appear as a qualified representative on behalf of the respondent.

Petitioner was represented by counsel:


Chad Jeffrey Motes, Esquire

Department of Labor & Employment Security Suite 131, Montgomery Building

2562 Executive Center Circle, East Tallahassee, Florida 32301


ISSUE


Whether petitioner should recover $735 allegedly disbursed by respondent under Contract 3-14.073-051 to one Kenneth L. Jenks?


FINDINGS OF FACT


  1. Kenneth L. Jenks of Franklin County was enrolled in a CETA program administered by the Bay County School Board at some point during 1983.


    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW


  2. Petitioner's counsel stipulated at hearing that, in order to prevail on its demand for reimbursement, the Department would have to meet the burden of establishing that Kenneth L. Jenks was ineligible for participation in a CETA program. Petitioner's theory was that Mr. Jenks resided with his mother rather than in a separate household as both he and his mother claimed; and that his mother's income was so high that no member of the household would have been eligible to participate in a CETA program. There was absolutely no evidence as to what his mother's income, if any, was. Nor did petitioner prove that Mr. Jenks lived in his mother's home. The evidence also failed to show that respondent ever paid Mr. Jenks any money.

RECOMMENDATION


It is, accordingly RECOMMENDED:

That petitioner abandon its efforts to recover from respondent any monies claimed under Contract No. 3-14.073-051.


DONE and ENTERED this 7th day of June, 1984, in Tallahassee, Florida.


ROBERT T. BENTON, II

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 7th day of June, 1984.


COPIES FURNISHED:


Lizanne Batey, Chief Bureau of Job Training

Department of Labor & Employment Security Division of Labor, Employment & Training Tallahassee, Florida 32301


Hiram J. Spurling, Director

Job Training Partnership Act Program Department of Education

Division of Vocational Education Knott Building

Tallahassee, Florida 32301


=================================================================

AGENCY FINAL ORDER

=================================================================


STATE OF FLORIDA

DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT SECURITY


DEPARTMENT OF LABOR AND EMPLOYMENT SECURITY,


Petitioner,

vs. CASE NO. 84-0845


DEPARTMENT OF EDUCATION,


Respondent.

/


FINAL ORDER


This matter was duly noticed and heard by a hearing officer on June 6, 1984 to determine whether the Respondent should pay Petitioner sums of money disallowed by Petitioner as being improper expenditures of money granted by Petitioner to Respondent.


The hearing officer issued a recommended order summarizing the issues, findings of fact, and conclusions of law.


Subsequent to issuance of the recommended order, the U.S. Department of Labor issued a waiver of the costs disallowed by Petitioner. Petitioner, in turn, issued an amended final determination, attached Exhibit A, which allowed all of the costs previously disallowed by Petitioner.


I find that is not necessary to decide the correctness of the findings and conclusions of the hearing officer upon the issues due to the allowance of all costs previously disallowed. The attached amended final determination is incorporated as a part of this order.


Therefore, this case is dismissed


Director, Division of Labor, Employment and Training



Copies: Joe Mills

Charles Pettis Chad Motes Robert Benton Henry Warren


Docket for Case No: 84-000845
Issue Date Proceedings
Aug. 27, 1984 Final Order filed.
Jun. 07, 1984 Recommended Order sent out. CASE CLOSED.

Orders for Case No: 84-000845
Issue Date Document Summary
Aug. 27, 1984 Agency Final Order
Jun. 07, 1984 Recommended Order Petitioner should abandon efforts to recoup monies paid.
Source:  Florida - Division of Administrative Hearings

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer