Final Order No. BPR-2006-06589 Date: Q
FILED
Department of Business and Professional Regulation
AGENCY CLE
DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION,
Petitioner,
V DBPR Case Numbers 2005-039318
2005-039702
2005-039705
ANTONEY MANNING
d/b/a/ MANNING BUILDERS,
Respondent.
I
FINAL ORDER
THIS MATTER came before Nancy Ten-el, Esquire, designated Hearing Officer for the Department of Business and Professional Regulation ("Department") on August 9, 2006, in Tallahassee, Florida, in accordance with the provisions of sections 120 569 and 120 57(1), Florida Statutes, for consideration of the Recommended Order issued on June 28, 2006 and exceptions filed thereto . Laura P. Gaffney, Chief Attorney, represented the Petitioner The Respondent appeared pro se by telephone.
At this hearing, the Petitioner withdrew its exceptions filed herein, indicati g that it believes the clarification of the findings in the Recommended Order are unnecessary. It is clear from the terms of the Recommended Order that the Administrative Law Judge found the Respondent guilty in DOAH Case Number 06-0601, which corresponds with DBPR Case Numbers 2005-039702 and 2005-039318. These case numbers are captioned
1
Filed November 7, 2019 11:24 AM Division of Administrative Hearings
DBPR, Petitioner, v Antoney Manning d/b/a/ Manning Builders, Respondent. The finding of guilt in DOAH Case Number 06-0601 clearly applies to Antoney Manning d/b/a/ Manning Builders and DBPR Case Numbers 2005-039702 and 2005-039318. Mr Manning agreed with this position, as does the Hearing Officer.
Based on the foregoing and upon consideration of the Administrative Complamt, the transcript of the corresponding Division of Administrative Hearing (DOAH) cases and the exhibits received into evidence, the Proposed Recommended Orders filed, and the Recommended Order filed by the Administrative Law Judge in this matter, and ·being otherwise fully advised of the premises, it is hereby,
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED THAT:
The Administrative Law Judge's findings of fact and conclusions of law in the Recommended Order are approved, adopted and incorporated herein by reference
The Respondent, Antoney Manning d/b/a Manning Builders, shall pay an administrative fine of $1000 00 and costs of $360 59 in DOAH Case Number 06-0601 (DBPR Case Numbers 2005-039318 and 2005-039702), due and payable to the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Northwood Centre, 1940 North Monroe Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2202, within thirty-five (35) calendar days from the effective date of this order Please refer to I/0 Number 7807165, file numbers 15 and 1270 when making payment
Case Number 06-000602 (DBPR Case Number 2005-039705) is hereby dismissed
4. This Final Order shall become effective on the date of filing with the
DBPR Agency Clerk
DONE AND ORDERED thisday of ;;;{fJ 0
otmQ_,
Simone Marstiller,Secretarjr)·
Department of Business and Professional Regulation Northwood Center
1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, FL 32399-0750
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
Unless expressly waived, any party substantially affected by this Final Order may seek judicial review by filing an original Notice of Appeal with the Clerk of the Depmtment of Business and Professional Regulation, and a copy of the notice, accompanied by the filing fees prescribed by law, with the clerk of the appropriate District Court of Appeal within thirty (30) days of rendition of this order, in accordance with Rule 9 110, Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure, and Section 120 68, Florida Statutes
CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE
of +,
I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing Final Order has been provided via U S Mail to Respondent at 11865 Register Farm Road,
Tallahassee, FL 32305 this g-f/-- day 2cfk
Agency Clerk's Office
Copy furmshed to.
Nancy Terrel, Hearing Officer
Jennifer Condon, Assistant General Counsel Mark Reddinger, Program Administrator
Issue Date | Document | Summary |
---|---|---|
Sep. 08, 2006 | Agency Final Order | |
Jun. 28, 2006 | Recommended Order | Respondent engaged in the unlicensed practice of contracting. Petitioner did not prove the allegation that Respondent also engaged in the unlicensed practice of electrical contracting. Recommend a lesser penalty. |