Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change

LATASHA MOORE vs DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE, 06-001459 (2006)

Court: Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 06-001459 Visitors: 23
Petitioner: LATASHA MOORE
Respondent: DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE
Judges: WILLIAM F. QUATTLEBAUM
Agency: Department of Juvenile Justice
Locations: Orlando, Florida
Filed: Apr. 24, 2006
Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Monday, June 19, 2006.

Latest Update: Aug. 01, 2006
Summary: The issue in the case is whether Latasha Moore (Petitioner) received excess salary payments from the Department of Juvenile Justice (Respondent) for which repayment is required.The evidence is insufficient to establish that a salary repayment was required.
06-1459.PDF

STATE OF FLORIDA

DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS


LATASHA MOORE, )

)

Petitioner, )

)

vs. )

) DEPARTMENT OF JUVENILE JUSTICE, )

)

Respondent. )


Case No. 06-1459

)


RECOMMENDED ORDER


On June 7, 2006, an administrative hearing in this case was held by videoconference between Tallahassee and Orlando, Florida, before William F. Quattlebaum, Administrative Law Judge, Division of Administrative Hearings.

APPEARANCES


For Petitioner: Latasha Moore, pro se

5506 Metro West Boulevard, Apartment 303

Orlando, Florida 32811


For Respondent: Mary Linville Atkins, Esquire

Department of Juvenile Justice 2737 Centerview Drive

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3100 STATEMENT OF THE ISSUE

The issue in the case is whether Latasha Moore (Petitioner) received excess salary payments from the Department of Juvenile Justice (Respondent) for which repayment is required.

PRELIMINARY STATEMENT


By letters dated January 30 and March 28, 2006, the Respondent advised the Petitioner that a salary overpayment totaling $723.62 was made during the Petitioner's period of employment with the Respondent. The Petitioner disputed the calculation and requested a formal hearing. The Respondent forwarded the request to the Division of Administrative Hearings, which scheduled and conducted the proceeding.

At the hearing, the Petitioner testified on her own behalf. The Respondent presented the testimony of two witnesses, and had Exhibits numbered 1 through 7 admitted into evidence.

On June 16, 2006, the Division of Administrative Hearings received a copy of a letter to the Petitioner from the Respondent wherein the Respondent directed the Petitioner to "disregard the previous overpayment letters sent to you on January 30 and March 28, 2006." The letter further provides:

The department calculations were in error. Upon further review of this matter, it has been determined that no salary overpayment is due.


No transcript of the hearing was filed. The Petitioner filed a Proposed Recommended Order.

FINDINGS OF FACT


  1. At all times material to this case, the Petitioner was employed by the Respondent, although by the time of the hearing, the Petitioner was no longer so employed.

  2. By letter dated January 30, 2006, the Respondent advised the Petitioner that two salary overpayments totaling

    $723.62 had occurred, for which repayment was sought.


  3. The Respondent's letter stated that for the bi-weekly pay period ending May 19, 2005, an overpayment of $400.73 had occurred. The letter stated that for the bi-weekly pay period ending June 2, 2005, an overpayment of $322.89 had occurred.

  4. The letter advised that repayment by cashier's check or money order was due within 15 days of receipt of the letter. The letter further advised that the Petitioner had the right to an administrative hearing to challenge the calculation.

  5. A second letter, essentially identical to the letter dated January 30, was issued on March 28, 2006.

  6. The evidence presented at the hearing failed to establish that the calculation of the alleged overpayment was correct.

    CONCLUSIONS OF LAW


  7. The Division of Administrative Hearings has jurisdiction over the parties to and subject matter of this proceeding. § 120.569, Fla. Stat. (2005).

  8. The Respondent has the burden of establishing that the Petitioner received the alleged salary overpayments and the amount of repayment due. Balino v. Dept. of Health and Rehabilitative Services, 348 So. 2d 349 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977). The Respondent failed to meet the burden. Further, by the letter dated June 16, 2006, the Respondent has acknowledged that the calculations were erroneous and that no repayment was due.

RECOMMENDATION


Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is

RECOMMENDED that the Department of Juvenile Justice enter a final order vacating the demand for repayment of salary overpayment and finding that no salary repayment is due from Latasha Moore.

DONE AND ENTERED this 19th day of June, 2006, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida.

S

WILLIAM F. QUATTLEBAUM

Administrative Law Judge

Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building

1230 Apalachee Parkway

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060

(850) 488-9675 SUNCOM 278-9675

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

Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 19th day of June, 2006.


COPIES FURNISHED:


Mary Linville Atkins, Esquire Department of Juvenile Justice 2737 Centerview Drive

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3100


Latasha Moore

5506 Metro West Boulevard, Apartment 303

Orlando, Florida 32811


Jennifer Parker, General Counsel Department of Juvenile Justice Knight Building

2737 Centerview Drive

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3100


Anthony Schembri, Secretary Department of Juvenile Justice Knight Building

2737 Centerview Drive

Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3100


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: 06-001459
Issue Date Proceedings
Aug. 01, 2006 Final Order filed.
Jun. 19, 2006 Recommended Order (hearing held June 7, 2006). CASE CLOSED.
Jun. 19, 2006 Recommended Order cover letter identifying the hearing record referred to the Agency.
Jun. 16, 2006 Letter to L. Moore from V. Chambliss advising that there is no salary overpayment due filed.
Jun. 15, 2006 Petitioner`s Proposed Order filed.
Jun. 07, 2006 CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
Jun. 02, 2006 Amended Notice of Hearing by Video Teleconference (hearing scheduled for June 7, 2006; 10:00 a.m.; Orlando and Tallahassee, FL; amended as to Tallahassee Hearing Room Site).
May 26, 2006 Respondent`s Witness List filed.
May 24, 2006 Amended Notice of Hearing by Video Teleconference (hearing scheduled for June 7, 2006; 10:00 a.m.; Orlando and Tallahassee, FL; amended as to Tallahasse Hearing Room Location).
May 11, 2006 Notice of Appearance (filed by M. Atkins).
May 04, 2006 Order of Pre-hearing Instructions.
May 04, 2006 Notice of Hearing by Video Teleconference (video hearing set for June 7, 2006; 10:00 a.m.; Orlando and Tallahassee, FL).
May 02, 2006 Answer to Initial Order filed.
Apr. 25, 2006 Initial Order.
Apr. 24, 2006 Letter to Department of Juvenile Justice from L. Moore regarding second request in response to letter regarding overpayment filed.
Apr. 24, 2006 Request for Administrative Hearing filed.
Apr. 24, 2006 Letter to L. Moore from V. Chambliss regarding salary overpayments (2).
Apr. 24, 2006 Agency referral filed.

Orders for Case No: 06-001459
Issue Date Document Summary
Jun. 19, 2006 Recommended Order The evidence is insufficient to establish that a salary repayment was required.
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