Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

SAMUEL CRUMITY vs GTE FLORIDA, INC., 96-003324 (1996)

Court: Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 96-003324 Visitors: 20
Petitioner: SAMUEL CRUMITY
Respondent: GTE FLORIDA, INC.
Judges: ARNOLD H. POLLOCK
Agency: Commissions
Locations: Tampa, Florida
Filed: Jul. 15, 1996
Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Wednesday, September 25, 1996.

Latest Update: Aug. 11, 1997
Summary: The issue for consideration in this hearing was whether the Respondent, GTE Florida Incorporated, had discriminated against Petitioner in employment because of his race.Claim of discrimination in employment (race) not substantiated where claimant did not appear or present any evidence.
96-3324

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS


SAMUEL CRUMITY, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 96-3324

)

GTE FLORIDA INCORPORATED, )

)

Respondent. )

)


RECOMMENDED ORDER


A hearing was held in this case by televised conference in Tampa and Tallahassee, Florida on September 10, 1996, before Arnold H. Pollock, a Hearing Officer with the Division of Administrative Hearings.


APPEARANCES


For Petitioner: Was not present and was not represented

by counsel or qualified representative.


For Respondent: Ernesto Mayor, Jr.

GTE Florida Incorporated

Post Office Box 110, MC FLTC0007 Tampa, Florida 33601-0110


STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE


The issue for consideration in this hearing was whether the Respondent, GTE Florida Incorporated, had discriminated against Petitioner in employment because of his race.


PRELIMINARY STATEMENT


By undated Petition For Relief received at the Florida Commission on Human Relations on July 5, 1996, Petitioner, Samuel Crumity, contended that the Respondent, GTE Florida Incorporated, had violated the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992 by denying him the position of central office equipment technician because of his race. The matter was forwarded to the Division of Administrative Hearings for formal hearing and this hearing followed.


At the hearing, counsel for the Respondent and a representative of the Respondent appeared at the time and place set for the hearing. Petitioner did not appear. Because the hearing location had been changed shortly before the hearing, the Hearing Officer delayed the commencement of the hearing for twenty- five minutes after the scheduled hearing start time but Petitioner did not appear.


The day before the hearing, when the decision was made to change the location for the hearing because it was to be held by televised conference, the

Hearing Officer placed a long distance telephone call to the Petitioner's home which was identified as such by the voice on the telephone answering machine which answered. At that time the Hearing Officer left a message that the location of the hearing had been changed and advised Petitioner of the new location.


The day of the hearing, fifteen minutes after the scheduled hearing commencement time, when Petitioner had not appeared, the Hearing Officer telephonically contacted the Hillsborough County Planning Commission in whose Manatee room the hearing for Petitioner was originally scheduled. The Commission's representative, whose work station was immediately outside the entrance to the Manatee Room, indicated that Petitioner had not appeared there. She also checked the other two rooms in the Commission suite where a hearing could have been held and Petitioner was not there nor had he been there.

Therefore, the Hearing Officer adjourned the hearing process and immediately dispatched a Notice to Show Cause to the Petitioner, at his given address, directing Petitioner to show cause within ten days of the date of that Order (September 10, 1996), why the Hearing Officer should not find Petitioner in default and enter a Recommended Order in this case recommending that the Commission on Human Relations enter a Final Order dismissing the Petition for Relief.


No response has been received from Petitioner.


FINDINGS OF FACT


  1. Petitioner presented no evidence in support of his Petition for Relief.


  2. Respondent presented no evidence in response.


    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW


  3. The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the parties and the subject matter in this case. Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.


  4. The burden of proof rests with the Petitioner to establish that he has been discriminated against by the Respondent as alleged in his Petition for Relief by a preponderance of the evidence.


  5. In the instant case, Petitioner offered no evidence to support the allegations of discrimination in his Petition for Relief.


RECOMMENDATION


Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is recommended that the Florida Commission on Human Relations enter a Final Order dismissing Petitioner's Petition for Relief.

DONE and ENTERED this 25th day of September, 1996, in Tallahassee, Florida.



ARNOLD H. POLLOCK, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550

(904) 488-9675


Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 25th day of September, 1996.


COPIES FURNISHED:


Samuel Crumity

2127 Salem Avenue North

St. Petersburg, Florida 33714


Ernesto Mayor, Jr., Esquire GTS Florida Incorporated

Post Office Box 110, MC FLTC0007 Tampa, Florida 33601-0110


Sharon Moultry, Clerk Florida Commission on

Human Relations

325 John Knox Road Building F, Suite 240

Tallahassee, Florida 32303-4149


Dana Baird General Counsel

Florida Commission on Human Relations

325 John Knox Road Building F, Suite 240

Tallahassee, Florida 32303-4149


NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS


All parties have the right to submit written exceptions to the Recommended Order. All agencies allow each party at least 10 days in which to submit written exceptions. Some agencies allow a larger period within which to submit written exceptions. You should consult with the agency that will issue the Final Order in this case concerning their rules on the deadline for filing exceptions to this Recommended Order. Any exceptions to this Recommended Order should be filed with the agency that will issue the Final Order in this case.


Docket for Case No: 96-003324
Issue Date Proceedings
Aug. 11, 1997 Final Order Dismissing Petition for Relief From An Unlawful Employment Practice filed.
Sep. 25, 1996 Recommended Order sent out. CASE CLOSED. Hearing held 09/10/96.
Sep. 11, 1996 Letter to hearing officer from E. Mayor Re: Enclosing documents GTE Florida incorporated introduced into evidence filed.
Sep. 10, 1996 Order to Show Cause sent out. (Petitioner to respond in 10 days)
Sep. 10, 1996 CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
Aug. 12, 1996 Notice of Hearing sent out. (hearing set for 09/10/96;1:00PM;Tampa)
Aug. 08, 1996 Answer of Respondent, GTE Florida Incorporated filed.
Aug. 08, 1996 Ltr. to from re: Reply to Initial Order filed.
Jul. 19, 1996 Initial Order issued.
Jul. 15, 1996 Transmittal of Petition; Charge of Discrimination; Notice of Determination: No Cause; Determination: No Cause; Petition for Relief; Notice to Respondent of Filing of Petition for Relief from an Unlawful Employment Practice filed.

Orders for Case No: 96-003324
Issue Date Document Summary
Aug. 08, 1997 Agency Final Order
Sep. 25, 1996 Recommended Order Claim of discrimination in employment (race) not substantiated where claimant did not appear or present any evidence.
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