Findings Of Fact In November of 1960 the Petitioner, Frankie L. Mills, became employed by the Florida Highway Patrol, and he was a member of the Florida Highway Patrol Pension System (Chapter 321, Florida Statutes). On approximately December 1, 1970, the Petitioner transferred from the Florida Highway Patrol Pension System, and he became a member of the Florida Retirement System (Chapter 121, Florida Statutes). In June of 1976, the Petitioner resigned from the Florida Highway Patrol to run for Sheriff of Okaloosa County. He was elected, and began his position as Sheriff in January of 1977. In the election of 1980 the Petitioner was not re- elected as Sheriff of Okaloosa County. As a result, his term of office as Sheriff ended on January 6, 1981, and the Petitioner vacated the office of Sheriff of Okaloosa County. The Petitioner did not resign from his position as Sheriff of Okaloosa County. His termination from the office of Sheriff was occasioned by the expiration of his elected term of office as of January 6, 1981.. During the time the Petitioner served as Sheriff of Okaloosa County, until January 6, 1981, he was a special risk member of the Florida Retirement System (Chapter 121, Florida Statutes). In August of 1981, the Petitioner became employed as a deputy sheriff of Gulf County. This employment qualified him as a special risk member of the Florida Retirement System (Chapter 121, Florida Statutes). The Petitioner has been employed as a deputy sheriff in Gulf County since August, 1981, and he is so employed at present. Between January 6, 1981, and at least August 11 981, the Petitioner was not employed by an "employer" as this term is defined in Section 121.021(10), Florida Statutes, and during this time he was absent from the payroll of any such "employer." Between January 6, 1981, and August of 1981, the Petitioner was not a "state law enforcement officer" as this term is used in Section 121.021(38), Florida Statutes, and Rules 22B- 2.002(5)(e) and (g), Florida Administrative Code. Between January 6, 1981, and August of 1981, the Petitioner had a break in his continuous service under the provisions of Chapter 121, Florida Statutes, including Section 121.021.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Respondent enter its Final Order finding that the Petitioner, Frankie L. Mills, had a break in his continuous service in the special risk category of the Florida Retirement System during the period of time he was not employed as a law enforcement officer between January and August, 1981. THIS Recommended Order entered on this 26th day of November, 1986, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. WILLIAM B. THOMAS Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, FL 32301 (904) 488-9675 FILED with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 26th day of November, 1986. COPIES FURNISHED: Gilda Lambert, Secretary Department of Administration 435 Carlton Building Tallahassee, FL 32301 Robert Scott Cox, Eq. P. O. Box 1876 Tallahassee, FL 32302-1876 Burton M. Michaels, Esq. 2639 North Monroe street Suite 207, Building C Tallahassee, FL 32303 APPENDIX The following constitutes my specific rulings pursuant to Section 120.59(2), Florida Statutes, on all of the Proposed Findings of Fact submitted by the parties in this case. Rulings on Proposed Findings of Fact Submitted by the Petitioner The Petitioner's proposed findings are not in consecutively numbered paragraphs, but the unnumbered paragraphs will be considered to be consecutively numbered. 1.-3. Accepted. 4. Rejected, as not a proposed factual finding, but an argument of law. Rulings on Proposed Findings of Fact Submitted by the Respondent 1.-9. Accepted.
The Issue The sole and limited issue in this case is whether John E. Wimberly "resigned" his position by abandonment as provided in Rule 22A-7.10(2)(a) Florida Administrative Code.
Findings Of Fact The following facts are established by the parties' Prehearing Stipulation dated October 3, 1986: The Respondent, John E. Wimberly, at all times material herein was employed as a trooper by the Florida Highway Patrol in Troop F, Manatee County Florida. The Respondent was assigned the following work shift: Friday, April 11, 1986: 7:00 p.m. 3:00 a.m. Saturday April 12, 1986: 3:00 p.m. 11:00 p.m. Sunday April 13, 1986: 3:00 p.m. 11:00 p.m. Monday April 14, 1986: 3:00 p.m. 11:00 p.m. The Respondent was involved in an automobile accident in Dade County, Florida, on April 10, 1986, while off duty. His brother, Willie Wimberly, and a third person, Felix Bush, were also in the vehicle. The Respondent was admitted to Palmetto hospital on April 10, 1986, and discharged on April 12, 1986, as a result of injuries sustained in the automobile accident. The Respondent underwent surgery performed on his right index finger for repair of a lacerated tendon. The Respondent's brother, Willie Wimberly, was admitted to Palmetto Hospital with injuries. The Respondent did not report for work on April 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15. The Respondent did not personally contact a supervisor or a duty officer of the Florida Highway Patrol to report his absence until approximately 11 30 p.m. on April 15, 1986. The State of Florida Personnel Rules and the provisions of the Florida Highway Patrol Policy Manual referenced in the Petitioner's Composite Exhibit #1 were in effect during the time period of April 10, 1986 through April 16, 1986. On July 23, 1985 and September 27, 1985 the Respondent John E. Wimberly acknowledged receipt of the Florida Highway Patrol Forms and Procedures Manual and further acknowledged reading said manual and being afforded an opportunity to ask questions of a supervisor concerning any questions about the manual. Sgt. Anderson from the Dade County troop of the Highway Patrol, who was investigating the accident told Trooper Wimberly in the hospital that he would contact Wimberly's immediate supervisor. Troop F in Bradenton was notified of Wimberly's accident at approximately 11:40 p.m. on Thursday, April 10, 1986. Petitioner's Exhibit #1 testimony of Wimberly). On Friday, April 11th, Major Paul Taylor, Troop F Commander, instructed his secretary to call the hospital to determine Trooper Wimberly's condition. Efforts to reach Wimberly were unsuccessful but the associate of the attending physician informed Major Taylor that the injuries were minor, that surgery was going to be done on Wimberly's finger and he would be released on Saturday, April 12th. (testimony of Taylor; Petitioner's Exhibit #1) Trooper Wimberly was released from the hospital in Miami at 1:30 p.m. on the 12th. On the evening of that date, his supervisor, Sgt. Cheshire, began trying to reach him at his home in Bradenton. Similar efforts were made on Sunday and Monday. On Monday night Sgt. Cheshire was told by Trooper David L. McCarter, Jr. that Trooper Wimberly was still in Miami and would be in to see him (Sgt. Cheshire) Tuesday. Trooper McCarter had called Wimberly in Miami. (Petitioner's Exhibit #1 testimony of Wimberly) At no time during his absence from April 11th through 15th did Trooper Wimberly, or anyone on his behalf, request leave. Wimberly's injuries in the accident consisted of a lacerated tendon in his right hand and a sprained ankle. He had a soft cast on his leg, and after surgery, a cast on his hand. He admits that he could have physically contacted his supervisors at Troop F but was concerned about his brother who had been seriously injured and after his own release, spent most of his time at the hospital. (testimony of Wimberly) Relevant sections of the Florida Highway Patrol Policy Manual provide Reporting Late for Duty If, due to an illness or other circumstances, a member cannot report for duty at the assigned time but will be late, the member will contact his/her supervisor before the start of the shift to explain the situation and provide an estimated time of arrival. Failure to Report for Duty Due to Illness. Any member unable to report for duty due to illness or injury shall notify his or her immediate supervisor as soon as possible on the first day of absence. If possible, the member should provide at least a 2 hour notice to allow for a replacement to be obtained. . . . Absence Without Authorized Leave Florida Highway Patrol officers are expected to report for duty on their assigned shift except when prevented by injury, illness, or emergency situations. Any leave of absence with or without pay shall be approved prior to the leave period except when emergency situations prevent such action. If an employee takes unauthorized leave, the employee will be placed on leave without pay status. Abandonment of Position Any member who is absent without authorization for 3 consecutive work days shall be deemed to have abandoned the position and to have resigned from Career Service. Any member who separates under such circumstances shall not have the right to appeal to the Career Service Commission and is subject to all pro- cedures outlined in Section 22A7.10(2) of the Rules of the Career Service Commission. 5.09.00 Sick Leave Members will be permitted to take sick leave only for instances of illness, injury or other reasons as specified in Section 22A-8.11 of the Personnel Rules of the Career Service System. The Department may, after three workdays of absence in any 30 calendar day period, require a medical certification of the member's illness before authorizing any additional use of sick leave credits by the member. Abuse of sick leave benefits by reporting off ill or injured when actually fit for duty will be grounds for disciplinary action. A member, while on sick leave for any reason, is expected to be at his or her residence, or to notify the immediate supervisor of any other location. (Petitioner's Exhibit #4) Trooper Wimberly was aware of the policy and has followed it in the past. (testimony of Wimberly) The absence of law enforcement personnel affects the staffing of shifts and sometimes court appearances cannot be honored. The details of when and how long an individual will be absent are important to the effective functioning of the troop. (testimony of Taylor)
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing, it is recommended that a final order be entered finding that Respondent was appropriately terminated for abandonment in accordance with Rule 22A-7.010(2)(a) Florida Administrative Code. DONE AND ORDERED this 29th day of October 1986, in Tallahassee, Florida. MARY CLARK Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 904/488-9675 FILED with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 29th day of October, 1986. APPENDIX TO RECOMMENDED ORDER IN CASE NO. 86-2154 The following constitute my specific rulings on the findings of fact submitted by the parties in this case. Findings by Petitioner 1. through 5. Adopted in paragraph #1. Adopted in paragraph #3. Rejected as unnecessary. Relevant portions of the policy manual are addressed in paragraph #4. Adopted in paragraph #4. and 11. Adopted in paragraph #1. Rejected as irrelevant. Rejected as unnecessary. Adopted in general in paragraph #5. The fact of termination is addressed in the Background portion of the Recommended Order. Findings of Fact Proposed by Respondent 1. through 3. Adopted in paragraph #1. 4. and 5. Adopted in general in paragraph #2. The period of hospitalization is addressed in paragraphs #1 and #2. Thursday night until early Saturday afternoon does not constitute three days. Rejected as immaterial. Major Taylor also testified that he could have been assigned to other duties. The issue was not his ability to function as a trooper. Addressed in part in paragraph #3 otherwise rejected as immaterial. Adopted in paragraph #3. Adopted in paragraph #2. Adopted in paragraph #1 as to the date and time of trooper Wimberly's return; otherwise rejected as provided in paragraph 7 above. Adopted in paragraph #4. Rejected as immaterial. His subjective intent was inconsistent with his failure to seek authorized leave. Ruling on Exceptions to Recommended Order Exceptions of Petitioner Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles 1. Not an exception - simply restates Hearing Officer's Findings of Fact 3 and 4. 2. Not an exception - simply restates Hearing Officer's Conclusion of Law 7. 3. Not an exception. 4. Rejected. Exceptions of Respondent Santiago Baez 1. 1 through 4 Rejected for the reasons set out in the Recommended Order in Conclusion of Law 7. COPIES FURNISHED: R. W. Evans, Esquire Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301 John E. Wimberly c/o Robert A. Pell, Esquire Florida Police Benevolent Association Post Office Box 11239 Tallahassee Florida 32301
Findings Of Fact At the times pertinent to this proceeding, the Dade County School Board (School Board) was a duly constituted school board charged with the duty to operate, control, and supervise all free public schools within the school district of Dade County, Florida. By Memorandum dated August 27, 1976, the attorney for the School Board recommended that it approve a list of individuals to serve as "hearing examiners" in certain hearings pertaining to personnel matters as required by different collective bargaining contracts and as to student expulsion cases. The Memorandum thereafter listed the individuals who were recommended by the School Board attorney to serve as hearing examiners. On September 8, 1976, the School Board adopted the recommendation of its attorney. The minutes of the September 8, 1976, meeting of the School Board, reflect, in pertinent part, the following pertaining to this action: A memorandum was received from the Legal Department, advising that the collective bargaining agreements between the School Board and the unions provide that in various circumstances, including suspension, dismissal and reduction in grade, the employee has the right to a review of the action. Also, the Florida Administrative Procedure Act was amended to provide for informal hearings con- ducted by impartial hearing examiners in student expulsion cases. With a view toward obtaining unbiased hearing examiners who can expedite cases at a minimal cost to the Board, the Office of the School Board Attorney and the Division of Employee Relations have solicited the services of various members of the Florida Bar and persons with experience in labor arbitration. It is believed that the following list of examiners will meet the needs of the Board in this area. These individuals have agreed to serve at the rate of $40.00 per hour. The minutes of the September 8, 1976, meeting of the School Board reflect the names of seventeen individuals who were recommended to serve as impartial hearing examiners. The minutes of the September 8, 1976, meeting of the School Board reflect that the following motion was adopted: That the school Board approve the list of persons named above to act as impartial hearing examiners in appropriate proceedings involving personnel and pupils, the hearing examiners to be reimbursed at the rate of $40.00 per hour for their time and to be designated as needed by the Superintendent or his designee. That the Superintendent or his designee be authorized to strike from the list the name of any hearing examiner who does not submit his or her recommended order within the time prescribed. The list of individuals to serve as impartial hearing examiners (who were sometimes referred to as hearing officers) was revised by the School Board on June 27, 1990, and on September 20, 1995. Petitioner's daughter is a student at one of the schools under the authority of the School Board who receives services as a gifted student under the School Board's Exceptional Education Program. Local hearing officers do not conduct proceedings pertaining to students in the Exceptional Education Program. Petitioner has never requested a hearing before a hearing examiner (or hearing officer) appointed by the School Board pursuant to the School Board's action of September 8, 1976, or as subsequently revised, and he is not involved in any pending or threatened administrative proceeding that would require the appointment of a local hearing officer by the School Board. Petitioner's daughter has never requested a hearing before a hearing examiner (or hearing officer) appointed by the School Board pursuant to the School Board's action of September 8, 1976, or as subsequently revised, and she is not involved in any pending or threatened administrative proceeding that would require the appointment of a local hearing officer by the School Board. Petitioner has never applied for appointment as a local hearing officer. He is not a member of the Florida Bar and there was no evidence that he is experienced in labor arbitration. Petitioner is not employed by the School Board. Petitioner is not affected by who has or has not been approved by the School Board to serve as a local hearing officer.
The Issue The issues are whether the agency statement identified as Section 5.02.08 of the Florida Highway Patrol Auxiliary Policy Manual falls within the definition of a rule, and if so, whether rulemaking is feasible and practicable.
Findings Of Fact Based upon all of the evidence, including the stipulation of facts, the following findings of fact are determined: Petitioner, Berwyn R. Spear, also known as Pete Spear, operates a business under the name of "Pete's Chevron" located at 2151 North Monroe Street, Tallahassee, Florida. Among other things, the business provides wrecker services for towing automobiles. Besides operating his service station, for the last twelve years petitioner has been a member of the Florida Highway Patrol Auxiliary (Auxiliary), a statutorily created volunteer service organization whose members ride with and assist members of the Division of the Florida Highway Patrol (FHP) in the performance of their regular duties. He has expended almost $1,000 for equipment and uniforms. The Auxiliary functions under the direct supervision of the FHP, which in turn is a governmental unit under the jurisdiction of respondent, Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles. Auxiliary members are not required to be sworn police officers but are certified by the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission. Members are required to have monthly activity amounting to a minimum of twenty-four hours per calendar quarter, but they receive no pay or benefits other than those prescribed by Part IV of Chapter 110, Florida Statutes, which governs volunteer organizations. Finally, Auxiliary members serve at the pleasure of the FHP director and are subject to removal at will. They have no statutory right of review or appeal for disciplinary action but there is an internal disciplinary review process administered by an FHP review board in Tallahassee. Pursuant to state law, and subject to further requirements in Chapter 15B-9, Florida Administrative Code, the FHP maintains a wrecker rotation list, by which the FHP facilitates wrecker services to persons needing assistance on the roadways. For the last twelve years and until February 1992, petitioner's business was on the rotation list and he derived several hundred dollars per month in such towing income. The rotation list works in the following manner. Whenever a trooper encounters circumstances requiring the towing of a motorist's vehicle, the trooper notifies the dispatcher of the need for a wrecker from the rotation list, unless the motorist expresses a desire for a specific wrecker service. The dispatcher then telephones the next appropriate wrecker service from the rotation list and makes a request for services. It is noted that FHP troopers are prohibited by internal policy 5.19.00 found in the FHP Policy Manual from being employed by any wrecker company (as opposed to just those on the rotation list) since the FHP deems this to be an unacceptable conflict of interest. The FHP has developed an Auxiliary Policy Manual (Manual) containing various written standards and guidelines governing the conduct of Auxiliary members. Like other policy manuals developed by the FHP, the Manual has not been formally adopted as a rule. As is relevant to this controversy, Section 5.02.08 of the Manual relates to the subject of conflict of interest, and prior to January 1992, simply stated in part that "any conflict between private employment and the FHP or any abuse of a member's FHPA position that benefits his employment will result in immediate dismissal from the FHPA." However, the FHP did not construe this provision as barring petitioner from being a member of the Auxiliary and at the same time having his wrecker business on the FHP rotation list. On January 29, 1992, the director of the FHP issued a memorandum to all troop commanders regarding a change in Section 5.02.08 of the Auxiliary Policy Manual. The newly added language read as follows: Due to the sensitive relationship between the Florida Highway Patrol and wrecker companies, employment involving wrecker companies that do business with the Florida Highway Patrol is considered to be a conflict of interest. The director's memorandum provided the following instructions to all troop commanders regarding the new language in Section 5.02.08: The attached policy revisions will bring the Florida Highway Patrol Auxiliary Manual in line with the Florida Highway Patrol Manual regarding employment by wrecker companies. If (sic) is requested that you survey all Auxiliary members in your troop to determine if any are in violation of this policy. Please take the necessary action to bring members found in violation of this policy into compliance. In the event the member cannot comply with this policy, it will be necessary that the member resign from the Auxiliary. Pursuant to this new policy, an FHP troop commander contacted petitioner in February 1991 and advised him that he must either remove his wrecker business from the FHP wrecker rotation list or resign from the Auxiliary. Although strongly disagreeing with the policy, petitioner advised the FHP by letter dated February 18, 1992, that he wished to remove his wrecker business from the rotation list. He did so in order to remain a member of the Auxiliary. After his informal appeal challenging the policy was denied, on August 7, 1992, petitioner filed his petition seeking to have the new language in Section 5.02.08 declared invalid as an unpromulgated rule. According to the FHP's chief of special operations, there is no discretion on the part of the troop commander or other enforcing officer except to require strict adherence to the policy. In other words, the policy in question is not subject in application to the discretion of the enforcing officer. Therefore, the policy has uniform application to all Auxiliary members and requires those members who own wrecker businesses on the FHP rotation list to choose between remaining a member of the Auxiliary or removing their business from the FHP rotation list. Since he is directly impacted by the policy, petitioner has standing to bring this action. In August 1992, respondent adopted substantial amendments to Chapter 15B-9, Florida Administrative Code, which relate to "Wrecker Qualifications and Allocation System." However, the rules do not address petitioner's concerns nor codify the so-called conflict of interest policy applicable to Auxiliary members. At hearing respondent also expressed the view, without further explanation, that if it had to adopt the Auxiliary policies as formal rules, it would be a difficult and "cumbersome" task, it might well "have the effect of eliminating the auxiliary service", it would "serve to inhibit the agency from doing its statutory job", and it "would seriously affect the ability of the agency to effectively operate an auxiliary volunteer service." These assertions were not contradicted. Even so, rulemaking is found to be feasible and practicable since there is no evidence to support a finding that at least one of the exceptions in Subsections 120.535(1)(a) and (b), Florida Statutes, is applicable.
Conclusions This matter came before the Department for entry of a Final Order upon submission of an Order Closing File and Relinquishing Jurisdiction by Thomas P. Crapps, Administrative Law Judge of the Division of Administrative Hearings, pursuant to Petitioner’s Notice Of Dismissal, a copy of which is attached and incorporated by reference in this order. The Department hereby adopts the Order Closing File and Relinquishing Jurisdiction as its Final Order in this matter. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED that this case is CLOSED. Filed May 29, 2013 9:27 AM Division of Administrative Hearings DONE AND ORDERED this Ay day of May, 2013, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. Bureau of Issuance Oversight Division of Motorist Services Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building, Room A338 Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Motorist Services this QQ day of May, 2013. tes Vorecvcte Nalini Vinayak, Dealer Ficense AE NOTICE OF APPEAL RIGHTS Judicial review of this order may be had pursuant to section 120.68, Florida Statutes, in the District Court of Appeal for the First District, State of Florida, or in any other district court of appeal of this state in an appellate district where a party resides. In order to initiate such review, one copy of the notice of appeal must be filed with the Department and the other copy of the notice of appeal, together with the filing fee, must be filed with the court within thirty days of the filing date of this order as set out above, pursuant to Rules of Appellate Procedure. JB/jdc Copies furnished: A. Edward Quinton, III, Esquire Adams, Quinton and Paretti, P.A. Brickell Bayview Center 80 Southwest 8" Street, Suite 2150 Miami, Florida 33130 equinton@adamsquinton.com John C. deMoulpied, Esquire Barack, Ferrazzano, Kirschbau, Perlman & Nagelberg LLP 200 West Madison Street Chicago, Illinois 60606 john.demoulpied@pbfkn.com James R. Vogler, Esquire Barack, Ferrazzano, Kirschbau, Perlman & Nagelberg LLP 200 West Madison Street Chicago, Illinois 60606 Jim.vogler@bfkn.com Thomas P. Crapps Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 Nalini Vinayak Dealer License Administrator STATE OF FLORIDA DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS LOKEY OLDSMOBILE, INC. d/b/a LOKEY VOLKSWAGEN, Petitioner, Case No.: 13-0007 vs. VOLKSWAGEN OF AMERICA, INC., Respondent. / NOTICE OF VOLUNTARY DISMISSAL WITH PREJUDICE COMES NOW Petitioner, LOKEY OLDSMOBILE, INC. d/b/a LOKEY VOLKSWAGEN, by and through its undersigned counsel and hereby files this Notice of Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice regarding its pending Petition Protesting Charge-back of Incentive Payments, pursuant to settlement of this matter. I HEREBY CERTIFY that a true and correct copy of the foregoing was served on the parties as reflected on the attached Service List, this 13" day of May, 2013. s/ A, Edward Quinton, III (Florida Bar No. 464074) ADAMS, QUINTON & PARETTI, P.A. Attorneys for Petitioner 80 SW 8™ Street, Suite 2150 Miami, Florida 33130 PH: (305) 358-2727 Email: equinton@adamsquinton.com Filed May 13, 2013 3:24 PM Division of Administrative Hearings SERVICE LIST Jennifer Clark Office of the Hearing Officer Florida Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Bldg. - Room A-308 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0635 jenniferclark@flhsmv.gov James R. Vogler, Esquire John C. deMoulpied, Esquire Barack Ferrazzano Kirschbaum & Nagelberg LLP 200 West Madison Street, Suite 3900 Chicago, IL 60606 jim.vogler@bfkn.com john.demoulpied@bfkn.com STATE OF FLORIDA DIVISION OF ADMINISTRATIVE HEARINGS LOKEY OLDSMOBILE, INC., d/b/a LOKEY VOLKSWAGEN, Petitioner, vs. Case No. 13-0007 VOLKSWAGEN OF AMERICA, INC., Respondent. ~~~ rere rere re rere rr ORDER CLOSING FILE AND RELINQUISHING JURISDICTION This cause having come before the undersigned on Petitioner’s Notice of Voluntary Dismissal with Prejudice, filed May 13, 2013, and the undersigned being fully advised, it is, therefore, ORDERED that: 1. The final hearing scheduled for June 18 through 21, 2013, is canceled. 2. The file of the Division of Administrative Hearings is closed. Jurisdiction is relinquished to the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles. DONE AND ORDERED this 21st day of May, 2013, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. va bay THOMAS P. CRAPPS Administrative Law Judge Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3060 (850) 488-9675 Fax Filing (850) 921-6847 www.doah.state.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 21st day of May, 2013. COPIES FURNISHED: Jennifer Clark, Agency Clerk Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles Neil Kirkman Building, Room A-430 2900 Apalachee Parkway, Mail Stop 61 Tallahassee, Florida 32399 A. Edward Quinton, III, Esquire Adams, Quinton and Paretti, P.A. Brickell Bayview Center 80 Southwest 8th Street, Suite 2150 Miami, Florida 33130 equinton@adamsquinton.com John C. deMoulpied, Esquire Barack, Ferrazzano, Kirschbaum, and Nagelberg LLP 200 West Madison Street Chicago, Illinois 60606 john.demoulpied@bfkn.com James R. Vogler, Esquire Barack, Ferrazzano, Kirschbaum, Perlman & Nagelberg, LLP Suite 3900 200 West Madison Street Chicago, Illinois 60606 jim.vogler@bfkn.com
