Findings Of Fact The Respondent is a licensed funeral director and embalmer holding license numbers 1231 and 1250 respectively. Clarence Quinn, a policeman employed by the Delray Beach Police Force testified that he has known the Respondent for approximately 35 years and at one time lived with the Respondent for an extended period of time. He testified that during the funeral of his mother on or about May 20, 1976, he encountered numerous problems in attempting to make the necessary funeral arrangements. He testified that the Respondent stayed in a drunken state for a two day period beginning May 21 and that due to his inability to make satisfactory arrangements with the Respondent, he had to remove his mother's body to another funeral home to make the necessary embalming and funeral arrangements. Messr. Quinn encountered similar problems with the Respondent during the funeral of his nephew during 1972. Lillian Rohming, Respondent's sister, also corroborated the testimony of Quinn and testified that he is suffering from an alcoholic problem which is, in her opinion, destroying him as a person and impairing his ability to function as a funeral director and embalmer. Messr. Hamon Thompson, presently employed by Meking Industries, was formerly employed by Respondent for approximately 8 or 9 years. During this period of time, he assisted the Respondent in making funeral arrangements and performed general staff duties 3 to 4 hours daily during afternoon and evening hours. He testified that it was not uncommon for the Respondent to remain in an intoxicated state frequently for periods lasting 3 to 4 days. To the best of his ability, he discouraged the Respondent and others from bringing alcohol on the premises. This was done, based on his observation of the Respondent's performance and/or lack thereof when he imbibed alcohol. He testified that without question, the Respondent is one of the more excellent embalmers and funeral directors in the area while sober but that within the last few years, he consumes alcohol excessively which has been detrimental to his performance as an embalmer and funeral director. He, like other witnesses who testified, including Lauren Braxton, Respondent's sister, Joseph Harrington, an acquaintance of Respondent's for approximately 20 years and Joe Poiter Jerkins, another of Respondent's sisters, all testified as to the severity of Respondent's alcoholic problems. The evidence is that while drinking alcohol, the Respondent is generally unresponsive to the requests of families during funerals; he occasionally lies down in empty caskets; he blows the siren while mourners including family members are viewing bodies and he occasionally interrupts funerals when, in the Respondent's opinion, the funeral ceremony lasts too long. James E. Shelton, an assistant of Respondent for numerous years, testified that based on his relationship with the Respondent, he (Respondent) has conducted himself in a mannerable fashion and that alcoholism is in no way a problem which affects the Respondent's ability to function as an embalmer or funeral director. He testified that although it is true that the Respondents business has fallen off recently, he attributes this decline due to conflicts respecting the ownership of the business. Based on the foregoing findings, I am constrained to conclude that the evidence compiled herein necessarily compels a conclusion that the Respondent is an habitual drunkard as alleged in the administrative complaint filed herein and I shall so recommend. Consideration was given to the contrary testimony of witness Shelton and Respondent's wife, Ester B. Poitier. However, on balance, the weight of evidence supports a finding that the Respondent is suffering from an alcoholic problem which has hampered his ability to function as a licensed embalmer and funeral director. I shall so recommend.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing findings of fact and conclusions of law, I hereby recommend that the Respondent's license to practice as a licensed embalmer and funeral director be revoked. ENTERED this 17th day of March, 1978, in Tallahassee, Florida. JAMES E. BRADWELL, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 COPIES FURNISHED: Michael J. Dewberry, Esquire Rogers, Towers, Bailey, Jones & Gay Florida Title Building Jacksonville, Florida 32202 Hartman Delano Poitier 379 South Dixie Highway Deerfield Beach, Florida 33441 Ronald T. Giddens, Secretary-Treasurer State Board of Funeral Directors and Embalmers 6501 Arlington Expressway, Suite 208 Jacksonville, Florida 32211
The Issue Whether Respondent's personal and operating licenses should be suspended, revoked or withdrawn.
Findings Of Fact The licenses of Gary Jack Faircloth, licensed funeral director and embalmer were suspended during the period of July 25, 1974, through October 25, 1974. Gary Jack Faircloth, Petitioner, vs. State Board of Funeral Directors and Embalmers, 312 So. 22nd 222, (Florida Appellate, 1st 1975). The Respondent performed funeral directing and embalming services with respect to the remains of: Eugene S. Francis who died October 1, 1974; Ethel Morse Collins who died July 25, 1974. Death Certificate for Ethel M. Collins was received by the local registrar March 14, 1975. Death Certificate for Eugene S. Francis was received by the local registrar January 17, 1975. The embalming and funeral arrangements for the two above named individuals were performed by Gary Jack Faircloth while acting as agent for on in behalf of or in the furtherance of the interests of Faircloth Funeral Home. Gary Jack Faircloth has failed to promptly secure licenses for himself as an embalmer and as a funeral director and he has failed to promptly secure licenses for the Faircloth Funeral Home which he owns and operates. Gary Jack Faircloth performed funeral and embalming services during the time he was under suspension by the State Board of Funeral Directors and Embalmers. Gary Jack Faircloth failed to execute and record each death certificate for the foregoing named decedents within the time required by Section 382.081, Florida Statutes, which requires a death certificate be sent for recordation within three (3) days after death.
Recommendation It is recommended that the personal licenses of Respondent, Gary Jack Faircloth, for embalming and for funeral directing be revoked. It is further recommended that the establishment operating license of Respondent Faircloth for Faircloth Funeral Home be revoked. August 21, 1975 DELPHENE C. STRICKLAND Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530 Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 COPIES FURNISHED: G. Kenneth Norrie, Counsel for the Board R. C. Blanton, Executive Director of the Board Dabney Ramseur, Jr., Trust Officer, Commercial Bank Gary Jack Faircloth, Respondent
The Issue Whether or not the Respondent, Franklin D. Zeigler, as a licensed embalmer violated Section 470.l2(1)(c), Florida Statutes, in that he has been found guilty by a jury in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Docket No. 76-227-NA-CR, after allegedly being charged with a crime involving moral turpitude; specifically, the convictions pertain to violations of 18 U.S.C. 371 (conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud the United States), 18 U.S.C. 1341 (mail fraud), 18 U.S.C. 1342 (fraudulent use of a fictitious name) and 18 U.S.C. 1343 (fraud by wire, radio, or television) Whether or not the Respondent, Franklin D. Zeigler, as a licensed funeral director violated Section 470.12(2)(c), Florida Statutes, in that he has been found guilty by a jury in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Docket No. 76-227-NA-CR, after allegedly being charged with a crime involving moral turpitude; specifically, the convictions pertain to violations of 18 U.S.C. 371(conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud the United States), 18 U.S.C. 1341 (mail fraud), 18 U.S.C. 1342(fraudulent use of a fictitious name) and 18 U.S.C. 1343 (fraud by wire, radio or television). Whether or not the Respondent, Franklin D. Zeigler, as a licensed embalmer violated Section 470.12(1)(k), Florida Statutes, in that he has been found guilty by a jury in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Docket No. 76-227-NA-CR, after allegedly being charged with a crime involving moral turpitude; specifically, the convictions pertain to violations of 18 U.S.C. 371 (conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud the United States), 18 U.S.C. 1341 (mail fraud), 18 U.S.C. 1342 (fraudulent use of a fictitious name) and 18 U.S.C. 1343 (fraud by wire, radio, or television). Whether or not the Respondent, Franklin D. Zeigler, as a licensed funeral director violated Section 470.12(2)(p), Florida Statutes, in that he has been found guilty by a jury in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, Docket No. 76-227-NA-CR, after allegedly being charged with a crime involving moral turpitude; specifically, the convictions pertain to violations of 18 J.S.C. 371 (conspiracy to commit offense or to defraud the United States), 18 U.S.C. 1341 (mail fraud), 18 U.S.C. 1,342 (fraudu1ent use of a fictitious name) and 18 U.S.C. 1343 (fraud by wire, radio, or television).
Findings Of Fact At all times pertinent to the complaint Franklin D. Zeigler held Funeral Director's license no. 1789 and Embalmer's license no. 1986, held with the State of Florida, Department of Professional and Occupational Regulation, State Board of Funeral Directors and Embalmers. On July 29, 1977, the Respondent was sentenced to four years in prison for violations of Title 18 U.S.C. 371, 1341, 1342 and 1343. This judgement and sentence was entered in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee based on a verdict of guilty, arrived at in Docket No. 76-227-NA- CR. A copy of this judgement and commitment order may be found as Petitioner's Exhibit 1, admitted into evidence. These federal crimes specifically pertain to the following: 18 U.S.C. 371 (Conspiracy to commit an offense or to defraud the United States) 18 U.S.C. 1341 (Mail fraud) 18 U.S.C. 1342 (Fraudulent use of a fictitious name) 18 U.S.C. 1343 (Fraud by wire, radio, or television) Based on the action taken in the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee, the Petitioner has charged the Respondent with violations of Chapter 470, Florida Statutes, pertaining to both his Funeral Director's and Embalmer's license. The action taken against his Embalmer's license is under Sections 470.12(1)(c)and (1)(k), Florida Statutes; and the action taken against the Funeral Director's license is in accordance with Sections 470.12(2)(c) and (2)(p), Florida Statutes. Section 470.12(1)(c), Florida Statutes, holds that it is a violation for an Embalmer to have been found guilty by a jury after being charged with a crime involving moral turpitude, and this is without regard as to whether a judgement of conviction has been entered by the court having jurisdiction in the case. Likewise, Section 470.12(2)(c), Florida Statutes, sets forth the violation in the same language as found in Section 470.12(1)(c) , Florida Statutes, the only difference being that this violation pertains to the license held by a Funeral Director. An examination of the nature of the judgement and commitment order for the United States District Court for the Middle District of Tennessee demonstrates that a jury or a court acting as the trier of the fact has found the Respondent guilty of crimes involving moral turpitude, and those findings establish a violation of Section 470.12(1)(c) and (2)(c) , Florida Statutes. The Petitioner failed to make any other presentation in terms of a factual allegation. Therefore, the allegations against the Respondent's license as an Embalmer and Funeral Director respectively, under the conditions set forth in Section 470.12(1)(k) and (2)(p), Florida Statutes, have not been shown because those two substantive violations are premised upon the finding that the licensee has violated any provision of the Chapter and may only be read to pertain to provisions not already addressed factually and by allegation in some other part of the complaint. In this case there was a contemporaneous allegation of violation of Sections 470.12(1)(c) and (2)(c) , Florida Statutes. Therefore, proof of a violation of Sections 470.12(1)(k) and (2)(p), Florida Statutes, does not lie.
Recommendation In the course of the hearing before the undersigned the parties were given the opportunity to present matters in aggravation and mitigation, and availed themselves of such opportunity. Having considered those representations in view of the facts in this cause, and in particular the fact that the Respondent had been held in violation of the laws of the Petitioner by a final order of December 17, 1976; which violation was similar in nature to the violation herein, and further for which violation the Respondent was given a suspended sentence; it is recommended that the licenses of the Respondent, Franklin D. Zeigler, Funeral Director's license no. 1789 and Embalmer's license no. 1986, be revoked. DONE AND ENTERED this 18th day of April, 1978, in Tallahassee, Florida. CHARLES C. ADAMS, Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 COPIES FURNISHED: Michael J. Dewberry, Esquire 1300 Florida Title Building Jacksonville, Florida 32202 John London Arnold, Esquire 919 East Adams Street Jacksonville, Florida 32202
Findings Of Fact Respondent, Sowell, is currently a licensed funeral director and embalmer in the State of Florida. Respondent, Sowell's Funeral Home, is a licensed funeral establishment in the State of Florida. Sowell is the licensed funeral director and embalmer in charge of Sowell's Funeral Home. On April 19, 1978, Mr. Eston Singletary died in Jacksonville, Florida. His divorced wife, Gussie Wright Singletary, called the Reverend Charles James Crosby to come to her former husband's death bed. Reverend Crosby is minister of the New Trinity Baptist Church in Jacksonville, and, while never a licensed funeral director and embalmer, he worked for the Sowell Funeral Home from 1949 to 1952 and from 1960 to 1968. Reverend Crosby has no financial interest in Sowell Funeral Home. Mrs. Singletary claims that Reverend Crosby represented to her that he owned Sowell's Funeral Home. It was for this reason, says Mrs. Singletary, that she contacted Reverend Crosby and agreed to turn her former husband's body over to Sowell's. However, there is no evidence to establish that Sowell either authorized or knew about such a representation on the part of Reverend Crosby, if it in fact occurred. Upon the advice of Reverend Crosby, Mrs. Singletary released her former husband's body to Sowell at the hospital. Mrs. Singletary did not have adequate funds to cover the expense of the funeral preparations so Reverend Crosby paid for the funeral and Mrs. Singletary agreed to reimburse him. Mrs. Singletary asked Reverend Crosby to handle the details of the funeral for her. Thereafter, Sowell handled the body of Eston Singletary, embalmed it and signed the required death certificate as funeral director. The evidence shows that in connection with Singletary's death, the Reverend Charles Crosby met with the family of the deceased, including Mrs. Singletary; assisted the deceased's family in planning the details of the funeral; advised the family regarding the release of the body to Sowell; arranged for flowers for the funeral; accompanied the family to a local casket company for its selection of a casket in which to inter the deceased; met with members of the family to collect information for completion of the required death certificate; and received case and checks from family members and other sources in an amount exceeding Sowell's charges by $142.76. When Sowell was contacted by Reverend Crosby, Crosby represented that he was acting on behalf of the deceased's family. It was to Reverend Crosby and not to the family that Sowell delivered the receipt for the services he rendered. On April 27, 1978, Reverend Crosby, on behalf of the family and Sowell, on behalf of the funeral home, entered into a contract for services to be provided in connection with the funeral of Eston Singletary. Reverend Crosby obtained personal information regarding the deceased from the family for Sowell. Sowell then arranged for the obituary notice. The night before the funeral there was a viewing of the deceased at the funeral home. Reverend Crosby was there escorting the widow. The following day, Reverend Crosby served as master of ceremonies at deceased's funeral which was conducted at a church other than the one with which the Reverend Crosby was associated. Sowell was in attendance at the deceased's funeral. While the widow testified that she had not seen Sowell at the funeral, such testimony is insufficient to overcome Sowell's testimony that he did attend the funeral since the widow, having never met Sowell, would not have recognized him if she had seen him. Sometime subsequent to the funeral, the widow went to the funeral home to get a receipt. Since the funeral home was closed at the time, she called Sowell at his home. Sowell informed her that the receipt had been given to Reverend Crosby. With regard to the remaining charge, the evidence was incontrovertible that the funeral directors and embalmers licenses of Sowell were suspended pursuant to section 470.10(1), Florida Statutes, when he performed the duties of a funeral director in connection with the death and funeral of Willy D. Whitehead on or about September 15, 1978. The suspension was occasioned by the timely payment of the annual license fee. Payment was made of renewal on October 19, 1978, at which time the licenses were reinstated.
