Findings Of Fact At all times material hereto, Respondent was licensed as a residential contractor. Respondent entered into a contract (Exhibit 1) to do the masonry and plumbing work on a residence constructed for J.F. Demers at Citrus Springs, Florida, for a price of $7310. This final price was changed slightly due to additions to and deletions from the work to be done by Respondent. There is no dispute regarding these contract changes, and no issue is thereby raised. Demers paid Respondent as the work progressed, and made a final payment of $3740 on May 31, 1983. At the time this payment was made, Respondent provided Demers with a Waiver of Lien (Exhibit 3) releasing the property from all liens for labor and materials. At this time Respondent owed Carroll Contracting and Ready Mix, Inc. approximately $5000, some of which represented materials delivered to the Demers project. On August 26, 1983, Carroll Contracting filed a Claim of Lien (Exhibit 4) against Demers' property. At the time this lien was filed, Demers was out of state. When he returned, he talked to William Hausman, Secretary-Treasury of Carroll Contracting and presented to Hausman the Waiver of Lien he had received from Respondent. Upon advice of attorney, Carroll Contracting released the lien filed against Demers' property on September 21, 1983 (Exhibit 6). By check dated July 20, 1983 (Exhibit 7) Respondent paid Carroll Contracting $2054.58. Writing on the face of this check indicated balance due of $3600. The exact amount was not disclosed, but a substantial amount of the balance due was for materials purchased for jobs done by Respondent other than the Demers job. Respondent had purchased materials from Carroll Contracting for many years, and had paid his bills promptly before 1983. Prior to delivering the first concrete to the Demers project, Carroll Contracting required Respondent to pay $1000 on his account. When Respondent learned Carroll Contracting had filed a lien against Demers' property, he called Hausman to offer to pay part of his indebtedness if Carroll Contracting would release the lien. Hausman refused and he and Respondent exchanged angry words over the telephone. A consumer complaint was filed against Respondent and an Information was filed against Respondent charging him with diverting funds received from Demers to another purpose (Exhibit 9). Respondent pleaded nolo contendere to petit theft of this charge, was adjudicated guilty, and was sentenced to pay a fine of $1000 with probation for one year or until the fine is paid (Exhibit 11). Exhibit 10 indicates Respondent pleaded guilty to petit theft and was sentenced as shown in Exhibit 11. Respondent denies pleading guilty and the inconsistency between Exhibits 10 and 11 support his testimony. Respondent has paid all of the monies owed to Carroll Contracting, and is paying off his fine at the rate of $100 per month.
The Issue Whether Respondents (“Dobson’s” and “Western Surety”) should be required to pay an outstanding amount owed to Petitioner, Doug Lancaster Farms, Inc. (“Lancaster Farms”).
Findings Of Fact Based on the evidence adduced at the final hearing, the record as a whole, and matters subject to official recognition, the following Findings of Fact are made: Oden Hardy was the general contractor for a project in Apopka, Florida, known as the Space Box project. Dobson’s, a subcontractor on the Space Box project, contracted to purchase 269 trees (including Live Oaks, Crape Myrtles, Elms, and Magnolias) for $53,245.00 from Lancaster Farms. Dobson’s supplied Lancaster Farms with all the information needed to file a “notice to owner” as authorized by section 713.06, Florida Statutes. A truck from Dobson’s picked up the trees and transported them to the site of the Space Box project. Upon arriving with the trees, Dobson’s discovered that there was no means by which the trees could be watered at the site. Rather than attempting to jury rig some manner of watering system as requested by Oden Hardy, Dobson’s transported the trees to its place of business, and the trees remain there. The parties have stipulated that Dobson’s has paid all of the invoices except for Invoice No. 5810, totaling $12,580.00. There is no dispute that the trees at issue are “agricultural products” within the meaning of section 604.15(1). There is also no dispute that Dobson’s is a “dealer in agricultural products” within the meaning of section 604.15(2).
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services enter a final order approving the claim of Doug Lancaster Farms, Inc., against Dobson’s Woods and Water, Inc., in the amount of $12,630.00. DONE AND ENTERED this 20th day of November, 2020, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S G. W. CHISENHALL 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 20th day of November, 2020. COPIES FURNISHED: Larry K. Dobson Dobson's Woods and Water, Inc. 851 Maguire Road Ocoee, Florida 34761-2915 Kelly Lancaster Doug Lancaster Farms, Inc. 3364 East County Road 48 Center Hill, Florida 33514 Western Surety Company Post Office Box 5077 Sioux Falls, South Dakota 57117-5077 Kristopher Vanderlaan, Esquire Vanderlaan & Vanderlaan, P.A. 507 Northeast 8th Avenue Ocala, Florida 34470 (eServed) Steven Hall, General Counsel Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services 407 South Calhoun Street, Suite 520 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0800 (eServed) Honorable Nicole “Nikki” Fried Commissioner of Agriculture Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services The Capitol, Plaza Level 10 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0810 (eServed)
The Issue Whether the respondent committed the violations alleged in the Administrative Complaint, and, if so, the penalty which should be imposed.
Findings Of Fact Based on the oral and documentary evidence presented at the final hearing and the entire record of this proceeding, the following findings of fact are made: Dr. Allen is, and has been at all times relevant to this proceeding, a licensed veterinarian in the State of Florida, having been issued license number VM 0003475 by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation. The Department is the licensing authority for persons who seek to practice veterinary medicine in Florida. The Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering ("Division") is a subdivision of the Department of Business and Professional Regulation. It is the licensing authority for the pari-mutuel wagering industry, with the responsibility for issuing occupational licenses to persons connected with racetracks, including veterinarians. The Division does not have jursidiction to issue or discipline licenses to practice veterinary medicine in Florida. Three stewards are assigned to a racetrack to ensure that the rules of racing are followed; one is employed by the state and two by the racing association at the particular pari-mutuel facility. The stewards have the authority to impose discipline upon persons who have pari-mutuel wagering occupational licenses if they find that the rules have been violated. On December 21, 1993, Dr. Allen was working at Calder Race Course as a veterinarian, and he was fined $500.00 in a ruling of the stewards at the Tropical Park at Calder Race Course for violation of Calder Racing Association Rule 1.21(4). The fine was imposed for Dr. Allen's failure "to conduct his business in a proper manner as an equine veterinarian in regard to the keeping of his records and the filing of bills." The charge which was the subject of the stewards' ruling derived from testimony Dr. Allen gave during a stewards' hearing regarding a positive drug test on a race horse named Ski Robbery. The charges at issue in the hearing were not brought against Dr. Allen but against the trainer of Ski Robbery. However, during the course of his testimony at the hearing, Dr. Allen admitted that he had added money to a bill submitted to the trainer for services rendered to Ski Robbery. On January 31, 1994, the Division filed an Administrative Complaint against Dr. Allen's pari-mutuel wagering occupational license, alleging violation of several of the Division's rules. In its Administrative Complaint, the Division alleged, among other things, that Dr. Allen had admitted to padding his bill to an owner/trainer by administering only one of the several drugs listed on the bill and that Dr. Allen had included an entry on a Veterinary Report of Medication filed with the state which was, by his own admission, false. On June 7, 1994, Dr. Allen entered into a Consent Order with the Division to settle the case and avoid further litigation. The Division of Pari- Mutuel Wagering agreed to accept a fine of $1,000 from Dr. Allen in full resolution of the matters contained in the Administrative Complaint. The Consent Order expressly stated that Dr. Allen did not admit liability or culpability with regard to the charges alleged in the Administrative Complaint.
Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is: RECOMMENDED that the Board of Veterinary Medicine enter a Final Order finding Jonathan S. Allen guilty of violating section 474.214(1)(b), Florida Statutes (1993), imposing an administrative fine of $500.00 for this violation, and dismissing Count II of the Administrative Complaint. DONE AND ENTERED in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida, this 19th day of March 1996. PATRICIA HART MALONO Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 19th day of March 1996.
The Issue Whether Respondent, FYV, Inc., d/b/a Miami Tropical Nursery, Inc. (Respondent or Buyer), owes Petitioner, Bud Sod, LLC (Petitioner or Seller), the sum of $7,168.09 for pallets of sod sold to the Buyer by the Seller.
Findings Of Fact At all times material to the instant case, Petitioner and Respondent were involved in the purchase and sale of an agricultural product grown and delivered in Florida. Under the terms of their on-going business relationship, Petitioner supplied Respondent with sod. There is no disagreement that Petitioner produced and sold the sod to Respondent. In fact, the parties had numerous dealings that covered many tickets noting deliveries and invoices noting the monies owed. Prior to July 7, 2010, the parties met without their attorneys to try and agree upon an amount owed by Respondent. At that time, they went through the volumes of paperwork related to the claim and reached a mutually-acceptable decision. Petitioner maintains that Respondent owes $17,168.09 as a compromised sum for the sod sold by Petitioner to Respondent. Of that amount, Petitioner acknowledges that Respondent remitted $10,000 to the Seller. Accordingly, Petitioner asserts that the sum of $7,168.09 is owed and unpaid for the sod purchased by Respondent. Respondent presented no evidence to refute this amount.
Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is hereby RECOMMENDED that the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services enter a final order approving Petitioner's complaint against Respondent in the amount of $7,168.09. DONE AND ENTERED this 9th day of August, 2010, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. J. D. PARRISH 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 9th day of August, 2010. COPIES FURNISHED: Christopher E. Green, Esquire Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Office of Citrus License and Bond Mayo Building, M-38 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0800 Kathy Alves Fidelity & Deposit Company of Maryland Post Office Box 968036 Schaumberg, Illinois 60196 Steven J. Polhemus, Esquire Post Office Box 2188 LaBelle, Florida 33975 Yolanda More FYV, Inc., d/b/a Miami Tropical Nursery, Inc. 104475 Overseas Highway Key Largo, Florida 33037 Richard D. Tritschler, General Counsel Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services Mayo Building, Suite 520 407 South Calhoun Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0800 Honorable Charles H. Bronson Commissioner of Agriculture Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services The Capitol, Plaza Level 10 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0810
Findings Of Fact 1. On August 25, 1982, petitioner received an application for pest control business license and identification cards, Petitioner's Exhibit 1, signed by Perry Commander, requesting licensure for Donald and Bales Exterminating Company, Inc., at 615 East Chestnut Avenue in Crestview, Florida. Ronnie James McLean was listed among those on whose behalf identification cards were sought. Petitioner granted this application on September 22, 1982, issuing License No. 343. Since approximately 1974, there have been applications for licenses at this location. Based on an application not in evidence signed by Byron Bales sometime before August 17, 1983, petitioner issued an emergency certificate. On August 17, 1983, petitioner received application form signed by Byron Bales, which petitioner returned to Mr. Bales for more information, and received a second time on August 29, 1983. Petitioner's Exhibit 2. The form gave Donald and Bales Exterminating Co., Inc., as the applicant's firm name and 615 East Chestnut Avenue in Crestview as the firm's address. Ronnie James McLean was listed among those on whose behalf identification cards were sought. Perry Commander's name was crossed out, as was his designation as "Certificate Holder." Nobody else was designated certificate holder, and nobody was listed as a certified operator. This application, which was made on a multipurpose form, has not been acted on. Boxes were printed next to various categories including "Initial (New) License," "Change-of-Business Ownership License" and "Renewal License." No box was checked, however. On February 4, 1976, Aggie B. Nelson of Chipley, Florida contracted with Donald and Bales Exterminating Co., Inc., (Donald & Bales) for treatment of the foundation of her two-bedroom frame house for termites and agreed to pay $30 a year thereafter for annual inspections and preventive sprayings. Petitioner's Exhibit No. 3. The contract gave a Crestview address for Donald & Bales. On March 24, 1982, respondent arrived at the Nelson home in a truck emblazoned with the Donald & Bales logo and sprayed underneath Ms. Nelson's house. He emerged with five or six bugs in his hand that he told Ms. Nelson were beetles. He said the house needed to be sprayed for beetles and offered to do it while he was there fob $230. Ms. Nelson allowed as how that would sure put her in a bind, but agreed to have him spray. Mr. McLean and Ms. Nelson each signed a Donald & Bales form contract on which Mr. McLean checked the box beside the word "Prevention" but not the box beside the word "Infested." The contract showed a Crestview address for Donald & Bales. Petitioner's Exhibit No. 4. Ms. Nelson wrote a check for $230 to Ronnie J. McLean personally. Later she began to inquire and eventually arranged for William E. Page, an entomologist in petitioner's employ, to inspect her house. At the hearing, Mr. Page was qualified as an expert in pest control and testified without contradiction that there was no sign of there having been a beetle infestation at Ms. Nelson's home at any time. Mardra Stewart was at home in her three-bedroom log house down below Orange Hill from Chipley when Ronnie J. McLean stopped by on April 19, 1982. "He sent some of the men he had with him under the house, and they c[a]me out with a handful of the sills," wood that appeared to have been eaten into by termites. Respondent told Ms. Stewart she should have her house sprayed because insects "had eat it up under there." (T. 89) She agreed to the spraying and paid respondent $225 for spraying. Mr. McLean and Ms. Stewart each signed a Donald & Bales form contract on which Mr. McLean checked the box beside the word "Prevention" but not the box beside the word "Infested." The contract showed a Crestview address for Donald & Bales. Petitioner's Exhibit No. 8. The next day Ms. Stewart called the sheriff and eventually she telephoned petitioner's Jacksonville offices. Mr. Page inspected her house and found no evidence of an active or recent infestation of insects of any kind, although he did discover evidence of old powder-post beetle damage. In his opinion, the Stewart house probably needed treatment. On September 15, 1982, Mrs. J. C. Phillips telephoned her daughter, Margaret Powell, and asked her to come to the Phillips house on Bayshore Drive in Niceville "to write the check for the exterminator." (T. 94) By the time Ms. Powell arrived, the spraying had been done. Ms. Powell asked respondent and his companion(s) to show her some beetles. When they were unable to do so, she declined to pay, even after respondent referred her to Byron Bales who was at work next door. Mr. McLean and Ms. Phillips each signed a Donald & Bales form contract on which Mr. McLean checked the box beside the word "Prevention," but not the box beside the word "Infested." Petitioner's Exhibit No. 9. The contract indicated prophylactic treatment of the foundation for powder-post beetles for $150, and called for annual inspections and resprayings for $45 per year. Petitioner's Exhibit No. 9. On September 22, 1982, when Mr. Page inspected the Phillips house, he found no sign of any infestation, new or old, by beetles (or termites). When tenting is not resorted to, the treatment for beetles is applying Lindane with a power sprayer in such a concentration that the odor lasts about a month. This odor was not present when Mr. Page inspected, one week after respondent's visit. Although Mr. Bales did not discharge Mr. McLean when he first learned that money had been diverted, "not on the first one. . ." (T. 167), he had fired Ronnie James McLean by the time of the hearing, because "he stole money from me." (T. 165) He accomplished this theft by selling contracts and cashing checks. (T. 167) Except for Petitioner's Exhibit 7, all the Donald & Bales form contracts state, "Please make check to representative." Having customers write checks in favor of the individual exterminator is "company policy." The Hearing Officer has had the benefit of petitioner's proposed recommended order and memorandum of law in preparation of the foregoing Findings of Fact. Proposed findings have been adopted, in substance, for the most part. To the extent they have been rejected, they have been deemed unsupported by the weight of the evidence, immaterial, cumulative or subordinate.
Recommendation Upon consideration of the foregoing, it is RECOMMENDED: That petitioner dismiss the administrative complaint filed against respondent as moot. DONE AND ENTERED this 15th day of December, 1983, in Tallahassee, Florida. ROBERT T. BENTON, II Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 15th day of December, 1983.
