STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS

ANTONIO CARRAWAY AND WHANG CARRAWAY,

Petitioners,

Case No. 20-2871

vs.

ST. LUCIE WEST COUNTRY CLUB ESTATES ASSOCIATION, INC., Et Al.,

Respondents.

/

RECOMMENDED ORDER

This case came before Administrative Law Judge John G.

Van Laningham, Division of Administrative Hearings (“DOAH”), for final hearing by Zoom teleconference on October 23, 2020, at sites in Tallahassee, Port St. Lucie, and West Palm Beach, Florida.

APPEARANCES

For Petitioners: Antonio Carraway, pro se

Whang Carraway, pro se 1406 Southwest Osprey Cove Port St. Lucie, Florida 34986

For Respondents: Jillian Sidisky, Esquire

Stefanie S. Copelow, Esquire Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A.

222 Lakeview Avenue, Suite 120 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401

STATEMENT OF THE ISSUES

The issues in this case are whether Respondents unlawfully discriminated against Petitioners on the basis of race, or retaliated against them for exercising a protected right, or both, in violation of the Florida Fair Housing Act.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT

In a Housing Discrimination Complaint filed with the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development on or around December 18, 2019, Petitioners Antonio Carraway and Whang Carraway alleged that Respondents had unlawfully discriminated against them on the basis of race by allowing neighbors to harass them, and by ignoring their requests for services. Petitioners also alleged that Respondents had retaliated against them.

The Florida Commission on Human Relations (“FCHR”) investigated Petitioners’ claims, and, on May 20, 2020, issued a notice setting forth its determination that reasonable cause did not exist to believe that a discriminatory housing practice had occurred. Thereafter, Petitioners filed a Petition for Relief, which FCHR transmitted to DOAH on June 22, 2020.

The final hearing took place on October 23, 2020. Mr. Carraway represented Petitioners, who declined to present evidence in support of their allegations of discriminatory practices. Respondent rested without presenting any evidence.

Unless otherwise indicated, citations to the official statute law of the State of Florida refer to Florida Statutes 2020.

FINDINGS OF FACT

1. Because no evidence was admitted into the record at the final hearing, the undersigned cannot make any findings of fact. § 120.57(1)(j), Fla. Stat. (“Findings of fact shall be based … exclusively on the evidence of record and on matters officially recognized.”).

   
   

   CONCLUSIONS OF LAW

2. DOAH has personal and subject matter jurisdiction in this proceeding pursuant to sections 760.35, 120.569, and 120.57(1), Florida Statutes.

3. In a case involving claims of housing discrimination, the complainants have the initial burden of proving a prima facie case of discrimination by a preponderance of the evidence. Generally speaking, a prima facie case comprises circumstantial evidence of discriminatory animus, such as proof that the charged party treated persons outside of the protected class, who were otherwise similarly situated, more favorably than the complainant was treated.1 Failure to establish a prima facie case of discrimination ends the inquiry. See Ratliff v. State, 666 So. 2d 1008, 1012 n.6 (Fla. 1st DCA), aff’d, 679 So. 2d 1183 (1996) (citing Arnold v. Burger Queen Sys., 509 So. 2d 958 (Fla. 2d DCA 1987)).

4. In the absence of any competent substantial evidence in support of Petitioners’ allegations, Respondents are entitled to the entry of a final order in their favor, as a matter of law.

1 Alternatively, the complainant’s burden may be satisfied with direct evidence of discriminatory intent. See Trans World Airlines, Inc. v. Thurston, 469 U.S. 111, 121,

105 S. Ct. 613, 621, 83 L. Ed. 2d 523 (1985) (“[T]he McDonnell Douglas test is inapplicable where the plaintiff presents direct evidence of discrimination” inasmuch as “[t]he shifting burdens of proof set forth in McDonnell Douglas are designed to assure that the ‘plaintiff [has] his day in court despite the unavailability of direct evidence.’”).

RECOMMENDATION

Based on the foregoing Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Florida Commission on Human Relations enter a final order finding Respondents not liable for housing discrimination and awarding Petitioners no relief.

DONE AND ENTERED this 27th day of October, 2020, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

S

JOHN G. VAN LANINGHAM

Administrative Law Judge

Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060

(850) 488-9675

Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us

Filed with the Clerk of the

Division of Administrative Hearings this 27th day of October, 2020.

COPIES FURNISHED:

Antonio Carraway Whang Carraway

1406 Southwest Osprey Cove Port St. Lucie, Florida 34986 (eServed)

Jillian Sidisky, Esquire Stefanie S. Copelow, Esquire Cole, Scott & Kissane, P.A.

222 Lakeview Avenue, Suite 120 West Palm Beach, Florida 33401 (eServed)

Tammy S. Barton, Agency Clerk

Florida Commission on Human Relations 4075 Esplanade Way, Room 110

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 (eServed)

Cheyanne Costilla, General Counsel Florida Commission on Human Relations 4075 Esplanade Way, Room 110

Tallahassee, Florida 32399 (eServed)

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO SUBMIT EXCEPTIONS

All parties have the right to submit written exceptions within 15 days from the date of 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: 20-002871

Orders for Case No: 20-002871