Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES vs SUNRISE COMMUNITY, INC., 93-001343F (1993)

Court: Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 93-001343F Visitors: 3
Petitioner: DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND REHABILITATIVE SERVICES
Respondent: SUNRISE COMMUNITY, INC.
Judges: DON W. DAVIS
Agency: Department of Health
Locations: Gainesville, Florida
Filed: Mar. 03, 1993
Status: Closed
DOAH Final Order on Tuesday, May 11, 1993.

Latest Update: May 27, 1993
Summary: Counsel for the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS), by motion dated November 6, 1992, seeks the imposition of sanctions against Respondent and its counsel as authorized by Section 120.57(1)(b)(5), Florida Statutes. Counsel's motion was referred by HRS's agency clerk on March 3, 1993, to the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) for conduct of formal proceedings. Section 120.57(1)(b)(5), Florida Statutes, provides: All pleadings, motions, or other papers filed in the proc
More
93-1343.PDF

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS


DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH AND ) REHABILITATIVE SERVICES, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. ) CASE NO. 93-1343F

) SUNRISE COMMUNITY, INC., )

)

Respondent. )

)


SUMMARY FINAL ORDER OF DISMISSAL


Counsel for the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS), by motion dated November 6, 1992, seeks the imposition of sanctions against Respondent and its counsel as authorized by Section 120.57(1)(b)(5), Florida Statutes. Counsel's motion was referred by HRS's agency clerk on March 3, 1993, to the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) for conduct of formal proceedings.


Section 120.57(1)(b)(5), Florida Statutes, provides:


All pleadings, motions, or other papers filed in the proceeding must be signed by a party, the party's attorney, or the party's qualified representative. The signature of a party, a party's attorney, or a party's qualified representative constitutes a certificate that he has read the pleading, motion, or other paper and that, to the best of his knowledge, information, and belief formed after reasonable inquiry, it is not interposed for any improper purposes, such as to harass or to cause unnecessary delay or for frivolous purpose or needless increase in the cost of litigation. If a pleading, motion, or other paper is signed in violation of these requirements, the hearing officer, upon

motion or his own initiative, shall impose upon the person who signed it, a represented party, or both, an appropriate sanction, which may include an order to pay the other party or parties the amount of reasonable expenses incurred because of the filing of the pleading, motion, or other paper, including a reasonable attorney's fee.

In paragraph 65, on page 22 of the recommended order, the following ruling was made by the undersigned regarding motions of HRS and an intervenor regarding the subject of sanctions.


The motions . . . sought the imposition of monetary sanctions and attorney fee awards. Inasmuch as it is impossible to rule upon each of the proposed findings of Petitioner for the reasons set forth in the appendix to this recommended order, the motions are, to some extent, mooted. The motions, to the extent they seek relief in the form of monetary sanctions or attorney fee awards, are denied at this time.


The present motion of HRS's counsel for sanctions and cost is apparently predicated upon the language contained on page 6 of the final order in DOAH Case No. 92-0342BID which reads as follows:


The issue of whether sanctions should be imposed may be raised in an independent proceeding at the Division of Administrative Hearings.


The final order was issued on September 30, 1992, adopting the findings of fact and conclusions of law set forth in the September 2, 1992 recommended order. Since the issuance of the recommended order and subsequent final order, the matter was appealed to the Third District Court of Appeal. These events occurred prior to the filing of the present Motion For Sanctions And Costs.


While the undersigned's previous denial of the motions for sanctions was not expansive, the denial of the requested relief was clear. In Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. S.G., 613 So.2d 1380, 1384 (1st DCA 1993), the court noted that an agency does not have the authority in issuing a final order to reject the hearing officer's conclusion of law with regard to an award pursuant to Section 120.57(1)(b)5, Florida Statutes. 1/


In view of the foregoing, the present motion of counsel for HRS for the imposition of sanctions pursuant to Section 120.57(1)(b)(5), Florida Statutes is denied and further proceedings in this case are dismissed.


The foregoing DONE and ORDERED in Tallahassee, Florida, this 11th day of May, 1990.



DON W. DAVIS

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 11th day of May, 1993


ENDNOTE


1/ Notably, the court terms the hearing officer's authority to administer sanctions under Section 120.57(1)(b)5, to be an "immediate responsibility" with the clear implication that such authority should be exercised during the pendency of the proceeding.


COPIES FURNISHED:


Robert L. Powell, Clerk Department of Health and

Rehabilitative Services 1323 Winewood Boulevard

Tallahassee, FL 32399-0700


Steven M. Weinger, Esq.

2650 SW 27th Avenue, 2nd Floor Miami, FL 33133


Ralph McMurphy, Esq.

HRS District III

1000 NE 16 Avenue, Bldg. H.

Gainesville, FL 32609


Emery Rosenbluth, Esq.

111 N. Orange Ave. Suite 900 Orlando, FL 32802-0285


NOTICE OF RIGHT TO JUDICIAL REVIEW


PARTY WHO IS ADVERSELY AFFECTED BY THIS FINAL ORDER IS ENTITLED TO JUDICIAL REVIEW PURSUANT TO SECTION 120.68, FLORIDA STATUTES. REVIEW PROCEEDINGS ARE GOVERNED BY THE FLORIDA RULES OF APPELLATE PROCEDURE. SUCH PROCEEDINGS ARE COMMENCED BY FILING ONE COPY OF A NOTICE OF APPEAL WITH THE AGENCY CLERK OF THE DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS AND A SECOND COPY, ACCOMPANIED BY FILING FEES PRESCRIBED BY LAW, WITH THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL, FIRST DISTRICT, OR WITH THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL IN THE APPELLATE DISTRICT WHERE THE PARTY RESIDES. THE NOTICE OF APPEAL MUST BE FILED WITHIN 30 DAYS OF RENDITION OF THE ORDER TO BE REVIEWED.


Docket for Case No: 93-001343F
Issue Date Proceedings
May 27, 1993 (Petitioner) Demand For Venue in Dade County, Florida filed.
May 11, 1993 CASE CLOSED. Summary Final Order of Dismissal sent out.
May 04, 1993 Letter to DOAH Clerk from S. Weinger (Request for Subpoenas); CC: Notice; Respondent's Motion for Sanctions and Costs; Letter to S. Weingerfrom A. Cole (documents returned; correct DOAH # not listed); Interrogatories; Notice of Ta king Deposition Duces Te
Mar. 11, 1993 Notification card sent out.
Mar. 03, 1993 Notice; Respondent's Motion For Sanctions And Costs filed.

Orders for Case No: 93-001343F
Issue Date Document Summary
May 11, 1993 DOAH Final Order An agency cannot remand for reconsideration, a hearing officer's denial of previous motion for sanctions and cost.
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