Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

BOARD OF COSMETOLOGY vs. EVELYN MOTEN, D/B/A EVELYN`S BEAUTY SALON, 76-001045 (1976)

Court: Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 76-001045 Visitors: 28
Judges: DELPHENE C. STRICKLAND
Agency: Department of Business and Professional Regulation
Latest Update: Oct. 06, 1977
Summary: Whether the licenses of Evelyn Moten d/b/a Evelyn's Beauty Salon should be revoked, annulled, withdrawn or suspended for violation of Chapter 477, Florida Statutes, and the rules and regulations promulgated pursuant thereto,to wit: 21F-3.08; 21F-3.01, Florida Administrative Code, in that the Respondent Evelyn Moten did operate a cosmetology salon without a salon license and the equipment of the salon did not include a wet sterilizer.Respondent operated salon without license and without wet steri
More
76-1045.PDF

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS


STATE BOARD OF COSMETOLOGY, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 76-1045

) PERSONAL LICENSE NO. 65699

EVELYN MOTEN, ) SALON LICENSE NO. 22693 d/b/a EVELYN'S BEAUTY SALON )

560 SECOND AVENUE )

DAYTONA BEACH, FLORIDA )

)

Respondent. )

)


RECOMMENDED ORDER


After due notice, this cause came before Delphene C. Strickland, Hearing Officer, Division of Administrative Hearings, Department of Administration, June 28, 1976 at 11:00 a.m. in the offices of the Board of Cosmetology, 308 Avenue A, Southwest Winter Haven, Florida.


APPEARANCES


For Petitioner: Ronald C. LaFace, Esquire

101 East College Avenue Tallahassee, Florida


For Respondent: Evelyn Moten, in proper person

560 Second Avenue Daytona Beach, Florida


ISSUE


Whether the licenses of Evelyn Moten d/b/a Evelyn's Beauty Salon should be revoked, annulled, withdrawn or suspended for violation of Chapter 477, Florida Statutes, and the rules and regulations promulgated pursuant thereto,to wit: 21F-3.08; 21F-3.01, Florida Administrative Code, in that the Respondent Evelyn Moten did operate a cosmetology salon without a salon license and the equipment of the salon did not include a wet sterilizer.


FINDINGS OF FACT


  1. The inspector for the Petitioner Board of Cosmetology, Ardie Smiley Collins, entered the salon of Respondent on or about December 17, 1975 at which time the Respondent Evelyn Moten did not have a salon license and the salon was not equipped with a wet sterilizer.


  2. Respondent received notice of this hearing and is present and has applied for a salon license in a different location than the location in which the violation notice was written.

  3. Respondent Evelyn Moten admits that she was operating a salon at the time of inspection without a salon license and that her salon was not equipped with the required wet sterilizer.


    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW


  4. Chapter 477, Florida Statutes, and 21F-3.08; and 21F-3.01, Florida Administrative Code, require a person who operates a salon to have a valid salon license issued by the State Board of Cosmetology. Certain equipment is also required to be in each salon. A wet sterilizer is part of the equipment that is required under the laws and rules and regulations. The Respondent Moten was in violation of the laws and rules and regulations as cited in the violation notice and in the Administrative Complaint.


RECOMMENDATION


Suspend the personal and salon license of Respondent Evelyn Moten for a period of thirty (30) days.


DONE and ORDERED this 19th day of August, 1976 in Tallahassee, Florida.


DELPHENE C. STRICKLAND

Hearing Officer

Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304

(904) 488-9675


COPIES FURNISHED:


Ronald C. LaFace, Esquire

101 East College Avenue Tallahassee, Florida


Evelyn Moten

560 2nd Avenue

Daytona Beach, Florida 32014


Docket for Case No: 76-001045
Issue Date Proceedings
Oct. 06, 1977 Final Order filed.
Aug. 19, 1976 Recommended Order sent out. CASE CLOSED.

Orders for Case No: 76-001045
Issue Date Document Summary
Sep. 28, 1976 Agency Final Order
Aug. 19, 1976 Recommended Order Respondent operated salon without license and without wet sterilizer in violation of rule. Recommend suspension.
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