Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION vs DANA MICALLEF AND DANA MICALLEF DESIGN DEVELOPMENT, 05-004275 (2005)

Court: Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 05-004275 Visitors: 9
Petitioner: DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION
Respondent: DANA MICALLEF AND DANA MICALLEF DESIGN DEVELOPMENT
Judges: ELLA JANE P. DAVIS
Agency: Department of Business and Professional Regulation
Locations: Palatka, Florida
Filed: Nov. 21, 2005
Status: Closed
Settled and/or Dismissed prior to entry of RO/FO on Tuesday, March 14, 2006.

Latest Update: Dec. 25, 2024
4a} Ney fy oO STATE OF FLORIDA By Sig, op DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULA’ Nea 4 Why ie DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, Petitioner, VS. Case Nos.: 2004-045539 DANA MICALLEF AND DANA MICALLEF DESIGN DEVELOPMENT, OS- YD. 15K” Respondents. / ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINT Petitioner, DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, ("Petitioner"), files this Administrative Complaint before the Board of Architecture and Interior Design against DANA MICALLEF AND DANA MICALLEF DESIGN DEVELOPMENT, ("Respondents"), and says: 1. Petitioner is the state agency charged with regulating the practice of architecture and interior design pursuant to Section 20.165, Florida Statutes, and Chapters 455 and 481, Florida Statutes. 2 The Department of Business and Professional Regulation has jurisdiction over the “. unlicensed practice of architecture pursuant to Section 455.228(1), and Section 481.223(1)(a), Florida Statutes, f i i KO Spy, Vo, aS FY a 493 3. At all times material hereto, Respondents were not duly registered or certified to engage in the practice of architecture in the State of Florida pursuant to Chapter 481, Florida Statutes. 4. Respondents’ Jast known address is 27 Hibiscus Drive, Ormond Beach, Florida 32176. 5. On or about June 9, 2003, Respondents entered into a contract with Peter Roehr to provide architectural services for a project known as the European Village in Palm Coast, Florida. 6. The project consisted of a 95 unit condominium complex including 35 retail units, along with a courtyard and fountain area. 7. Throughout the contract, Respondents hold themselves out as the ‘‘Architect”. 8, Respondents entered into a contract with Robert McCrory to provide architectural services for a project known as the La Vista Del Sol Condominiums on Atlantic Avenue in Daytona Beach Shores, Florida. 9, In a letter dated May 26, 2004, the Respondent describes the services he provided under the contract as “architectural design services” and demands payment in the amount of $29,120.00. COUNT I 10. Petitioner hereby realleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through nine (9) as if fully set forth herein. 1]. Section 48 1.223(1)(a), Florida Statutes, states that a person may not knowingly “practice architecture unless the person is an architect or a registered architect.” ww 12. Based upon the foregoing, Respondents, have violated Section 481.223(1)(a), Florida Stautes, by practicing architecture when they were not the holder of a valid license by contracting to provide architectural services and accepting payment for architectural services involving commercial property for the European Village project in Palm Coast, Florida. COUNT I 13. Petitioner hereby realleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through nine (9) as if fully set forth herein. 14, Section 481.223(1)(a), Florida Statutes, states that a person may not knowingly “practice architecture unless the person is an architect or a registered architect.” 15. Based upon the foregoing, Respondents, have violated Section 481.223(1)(a), Florida Statutes, by practicing architecture when they were not the holder of a valid license by contracting to provide architectural services and accepting payment for architectural services involving commercial property for the project known as the La Vista Del Sol Condominiums on Atlantic Avenue in Daytona Beach Shores, Florida. COUNT II 16. Petitioner hereby realleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through nine (9) as if fully set forth herein. 17. Section 481.223(1)(c), Florida Statutes, states that a person may not knowingly “use the name or title ‘architect’ or ‘registered architect’ or words to that effect, when the person is not then the holder of a valid license.” 18. Based upon the foregoing, the Respondents have violated Section 481.223(1)(c), Florida Statutes, by using the name or title “architect”, when they were not the holder of a valid license. COUNT IV 19. Petitioner hereby realleges and incorporates paragraphs one (1) through nine (9) as if fully set forth herein. 20. Section 481.219(2), Florida Statutes, states a corporation, partnership, or a person practicing under a fictitious name, offering architectural services to the public must obtain a certificate of authorization. 21. Based upon the foregoing, Respondent, Dana Micallef Design Development has violated Section 481.219(2), Florida Statutes, by offering architectural services when it was not the holder of a valid certificate of authorization. WHEREFORE, Petitioner respectfully requests the Board enter an Order imposing an administrative fine not to exceed $5,000 per count, assess costs associated with investigation and prosecution, impose any or all penalties delineated within Section 455.227(2), Florida Statutes, and/or any other relief that the Board is authorized to impose pursuant to Chapters 481 and 455, Florida Statutes, and/or the rules promulgated thereunder. . N~ — Signed this 29° dayof_“cb-vw = , 2005, "Pane Business fl l E D Depura een CLE Rye Reputation Q2N 24%. CLERK Peptnttray, DAVID K. MINACCI DATE Smith, Thompson, Shaw & Manausa, P.A. 2075 Centre Pointe Blvd. 222s Tallahassee, Fl 32308-4893 FL Bar No. 0056774 Ph: (850) 402-1570 Fax: (850) 402-1508

Docket for Case No: 05-004275
Issue Date Proceedings
Mar. 27, 2006 Notice of Appearance (filed by L. Griggs).
Mar. 14, 2006 Order Closing File. CASE CLOSED.
Feb. 27, 2006 Amended Motion to Relinquish Jurisdiction filed.
Feb. 23, 2006 Order Granting Continuance (parties to advise status by March 8, 2006).
Feb. 23, 2006 Amended Order to Show Cause (hearing scheduled for February 23, 2006, is cancelled; Petitioner is granted until March 13, 2006, in which to show cause, in writing, filed with DOAH, why the Request for Admissions should not be deemed admitted; on or before March 8, 2006, parties shall confer and provide mutually agreeable dates for rescheduling the final hearing in April and May 2006).
Feb. 14, 2006 Order to Show Cause (hearing scheduled for February 23, 2006, is cancelled; Petitioner is granted 30 days from instant date in which to show cause why the Requests for Admission should not be deemed admitted; Petitioner`s Motion to Relinquish Jurisdiction is taken under advisement pending Respondent`s response on or before March 8, 2006).
Feb. 10, 2006 Notice of Taking Deposition filed.
Jan. 12, 2006 Petitioner`s Motion to Reschedule Hearing filed.
Jan. 11, 2006 Order of Pre-hearing Instructions.
Jan. 11, 2006 Notice of Hearing (hearing set for February 23, 2006; 9:30 a.m.; Palatka, FL).
Jan. 05, 2006 Motion to Compel Responses to Interrogatories and Requests for Production filed.
Jan. 05, 2006 Motion to Relinquish Jurisdiction for Hearing not Involving Disputed Issues of Material Fact filed.
Nov. 29, 2005 Respondent`s Response to Initial Order filed.
Nov. 22, 2005 Initial Order.
Nov. 21, 2005 Answer filed.
Nov. 21, 2005 Notice of Filing Petitioner`s First Set of Interrogatories, First Requests for Production and Requests for Admission filed.
Nov. 21, 2005 Election of Rights filed.
Nov. 21, 2005 Administrative Complaint filed.
Nov. 21, 2005 Referral Letter filed.
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