Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

MATTIE LOMAX vs CITRUS HEALTH NETWORK, INC., AND JOSE GARCIA, ADMINISTRATOR, 12-001552 (2012)

Court: Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 12-001552 Visitors: 18
Petitioner: MATTIE LOMAX
Respondent: CITRUS HEALTH NETWORK, INC., AND JOSE GARCIA, ADMINISTRATOR
Judges: JUNE C. MCKINNEY
Agency: Florida Commission on Human Relations
Locations: Miami, Florida
Filed: Apr. 27, 2012
Status: Closed
Recommended Order on Monday, July 9, 2012.

Latest Update: Sep. 17, 2012
Summary: Whether a discriminatory housing practice occurred against Petitioner by Citrus Health Network Inc., and Jose Garcia.Petitioner failed to meet her burden of proving a discriminatory housing practice occurred.
TempHtml


STATE OF FLORIDA COMMISSION ON HUMAN RELATIONS


MATTIE LOMAX, HUD Case No. 04-12-0250-8


Petitioner, FCHR Case No. 2012H0128


v. DOAH Case No. 12-1552


CITRUS HEALTH NETWORK, INC., FCHR Order No. 12-047 AND JOSE GARCIA, ADMINISTRATOR,


Respondents.

/


FINAL ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR RELIEF FROM A DISCRIMINATORY HOUSING PRACTICE


Preliminary Matters


Petitioner Mattie Lomax filed a housing discrimination complaint pursuant to the Fair Housing Act, Sections 760.20 - 760.37, Florida Statutes (2011), alleging that Respondents Citrus Health Network, Inc., and Jose Garcia, Administrator, committed a discriminatory housing practice on the bases of Petitioner’s race (African American), sex (female) and handicap by denying Petitioner “last month” rent assistance for which Petitioner had applied through a program administered by Respondents.

The allegations set forth in the complaint were investigated, and, on April 4, 2012, the Executive Director issued a determination finding that there was no reasonable cause to believe that a discriminatory housing practice had occurred.

Petitioner filed a Petition for Relief from a Discriminatory Housing Practice and the case was transmitted to the Division of Administrative Hearings for the conduct of a formal proceeding.

An evidentiary hearing was held in Miami, Florida, on June 7, 2012, before Administrative Law Judge June C. McKinney.

Judge McKinney issued a Recommended Order of dismissal, dated July 9, 2012.

The Commission panel designated below considered the record of this matter and determined the action to be taken on the Recommended Order.


Findings of Fact


A transcript of the proceeding before the Administrative Law Judge was not filed with the Commission. In the absence of a transcript of the proceeding before the Administrative Law Judge, the Recommended Order is the only evidence for the Commission to consider. See National Industries, Inc. v. Commission on Human



Filed September 17, 2012 2:31 PM Division of Administrative Hearings


Relations, et al., 527 So. 2d 894, at 897, 898 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). Accord, Mack v. Agency for Persons with Disabilities, FCHR Order No. 11-026 (March 17, 2011), Hall v. Villages of West Oaks HOA, FCHR Order No. 08-007 (January 14, 2008), Beach- Gutierrez v. Bay Medical Center, FCHR Order No. 05-011 (January 19, 2005), and Waaser v. Streit’s Motorsports, FCHR Order No. 04-157 (November 30, 2004).

We adopt the Administrative Law Judge’s findings of fact.


Conclusions of Law


We find the Administrative Law Judge’s application of the law to the facts to result in a correct disposition of the matter.

We adopt the Administrative Law Judge’s conclusions of law.


Exceptions


Petitioner filed exceptions to the Recommended Order in a document entitled, “Petitioner Submit Written Exceptions,” received by the Commission on or about July 25, 2012.

Generally, the document excepts to the Recommended Order’s conclusion that no discriminatory housing practice occurred.

In the absence of a transcript of the proceeding before the Administrative Law Judge, the Commission is bound by the facts found in the Recommended Order, since there is no way for the Commission to determine the extent to which the facts found are supported by the testimony presented. Gainey v. Winn Dixie Stores, Inc., FCHR Order No. 07-054 (October 12, 2007).

With regard to findings of fact set out in Recommended Orders, the Administrative Procedure Act states, “The agency may not reject or modify the findings of fact unless the agency first determines from a review of the entire record, and states with particularity in the order, that the findings of fact were not based upon competent substantial evidence or that the proceedings on which the findings were based did not comply with the essential requirements of law [emphasis added].” Section 120.57(1)(l), Florida Statutes (2012). As indicated, above, in the absence of a transcript of the proceeding before the Administrative Law Judge, the Recommended Order is the only evidence for the Commission to consider. See, National Industries, Inc., supra. Accord, Hall, supra, Jones v. Suwannee County School Board, FCHR Order No. 06-088 (September 11, 2006), Johnson v. Tree of Life, Inc., FCHR Order No 05-087 (July 12, 2005), Beach-Gutierrez, supra, and Waaser, supra.

Further, the Commission has stated, “It is well settled that it is the Administrative Law Judge’s function ‘to consider all of the evidence presented and reach ultimate conclusions of fact based on competent substantial evidence by resolving conflicts, judging the credibility of witnesses and drawing permissible inferences therefrom. If the evidence presented supports two inconsistent findings, it is the Administrative Law


Judge’s role to decide between them.’ Beckton v. Department of Children and Family Services, 21 F.A.L.R. 1735, at 1736 (FCHR 1998), citing Maggio v. Martin Marietta

Aerospace, 9 F.A.L.R. 2168, at 2171 (FCHR 1986).” Barr v. Columbia Ocala Regional

Medical Center, 22 F.A.L.R. 1729, at 1730 (FCHR 1999). Accord, Bowles v. Jackson County Hospital Corporation, FCHR Order No. 05-135 (December 6, 2005) and Eaves v. IMT-LB Central Florida Portfolio, LLC, FCHR Order No. 11-029 (March 17, 2011).

In addition, it has been stated, “The ultimate question of the existence of discrimination is a question of fact.” Florida Department of Community Affairs v.

Bryant, 586 So. 2d 1205, at 1209 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). Accord, Coley v. Bay County Board of County Commissioners, FCHR Order No. 10-027 (March 17, 2010) and Eaves, supra.

Based on the foregoing, Petitioner’s exceptions are rejected.


Dismissal


The Petition for Relief and Housing Discrimination Complaint are DISMISSED with prejudice.

The parties have the right to seek judicial review of this Order. The Commission and the appropriate District Court of Appeal must receive notice of appeal within 30 days of the date this Order is filed with the Clerk of the Commission. Explanation of the right to appeal is found in Section 120.68, Florida Statutes, and in the Florida Rules of Appellate Procedure 9.110.


DONE AND ORDERED this 17th day of September , 2012. FOR THE FLORIDA COMMISSION ON HUMAN RELATIONS:


Commissioner Gilbert M. Singer, Panel Chairperson; Commissioner Onelia Fajardo; and

Commissioner Michael Keller


Filed this 17th day of September , 2012, in Tallahassee, Florida.


/s/ Violet Crawford, Clerk

Commission on Human Relations 2009 Apalachee Parkway, Suite 100

Tallahassee, FL 32301

(850) 488-7082


Copies furnished to:


Mattie Lomax

212 Northwest 15th Street, Apt. 1

Miami, FL 33136


Citrus Health Network, Inc., and Jose Garcia, Administrator

c/o Olga Golik, Esq.

4175 West 20th Avenue, Third Floor Hialeah, FL 33012-5875


June C. McKinney, Administrative Law Judge, DOAH James Mallue, Legal Advisor for Commission Panel


I HEREBY CERTIFY that a copy of the foregoing has been mailed to the above listed addressees this 17th day of September , 2012.


By: /s/ Clerk of the Commission

Florida Commission on Human Relations


Docket for Case No: 12-001552
Issue Date Proceedings
Sep. 17, 2012 Petitioner Submit Written Exceptions filed.
Sep. 17, 2012 Agency Final Order Dismissing Petition for Relief from a Discriminatory Housing Practice filed.
Jul. 09, 2012 Recommended Order (hearing held June 7, 2012). CASE CLOSED.
Jul. 09, 2012 Recommended Order cover letter identifying the hearing record referred to the Agency.
Jul. 05, 2012 Petitioner Motion to Strike Respondent Motion to Dismiss Retroactive Petition filed.
Jun. 27, 2012 Respondent's Motoin to Dismiss Retroactive Petition Against Respondent filed.
Jun. 15, 2012 Respondent's Proposed Recommended Order filed.
Jun. 15, 2012 Petitioner Retroactive Petition and for Relief (exhibits not available for viewing) filed.
Jun. 07, 2012 CASE STATUS: Hearing Held.
Jun. 01, 2012 Order Denying Motion to Quash Subpoena.
Jun. 01, 2012 CASE STATUS: Motion Hearing Partially Held; continued to date not certain.
Jun. 01, 2012 Return of Service filed.
Jun. 01, 2012 Return of Service filed.
May 31, 2012 Respondent's Motion to Dismiss Complaint Against Respondent filed.
May 31, 2012 List of Potential Witnesses filed.
May 31, 2012 Respondent's Motion to Quash Subpoena filed.
May 24, 2012 Subpoena ad Testificandum (Inspector for Citrus health Network Inc.) filed.
May 14, 2012 Subpoena Duces Tecum (George Mensah) (incomplete) filed.
May 11, 2012 Subpoena ad Testificandum (George Mensah) filed.
May 10, 2012 Certificate of Indigency.
May 10, 2012 Application for Determination of Civil Indigent Status filed.
May 10, 2012 List of Names (Witness List) filed.
May 10, 2012 Subpoena ad Testificandum (Roberto Tazoe, Alberto) filed.
May 07, 2012 Certified Return Receipt received this date from the U.S. Postal Service.
May 01, 2012 Certified Mail Receipts stamped this date by the U.S. Postal Service.
May 01, 2012 Order of Pre-hearing Instructions.
May 01, 2012 Notice of Hearing (hearing set for June 7, 2012; 9:00 a.m.; Miami, FL).
Apr. 27, 2012 Initial Order.
Apr. 27, 2012 Housing Discrimination Complaint filed.
Apr. 27, 2012 Determination filed.
Apr. 27, 2012 Notice of Determination of No Cause filed.
Apr. 27, 2012 Transmittal of Petition filed by the Agency.
Apr. 27, 2012 Petition for Relief filed.

Orders for Case No: 12-001552
Issue Date Document Summary
Sep. 17, 2012 Agency Final Order
Jul. 09, 2012 Recommended Order Petitioner failed to meet her burden of proving a discriminatory housing practice occurred.
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