Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
Find Similar Cases by Filters
You can browse Case Laws by Courts, or by your need.
Find 49 similar cases
EDUCATION PRACTICES COMMISSION vs. ROBERT EDWIN HOUGH, 83-000244 (1983)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 83-000244 Latest Update: Jan. 03, 1984

Findings Of Fact The Respondent, Robert E. Hough, holds Florida Teacher's Certificate Number 313219, which is a Rank III certificate covering the area of substitute teaching. From September, 1975, until his dismissal on May 20, 1982, the Respondent had been employed with the Duval County School System as a substitute teacher. He was never employed in a full-time position. During the times relevant to this proceeding, the Respondent was employed with First Federal Savings and Loan Association of Jacksonville, as a manager of the Mandarin Branch, until his termination on May 29, 1981. While the Respondent was employed with First Federal Savings and Loan, one of his associates was Mr. Frazier Dughi. Mr. Dughi was employed with First Federal Savings and Loan as an officer in the Real Estate Department until he left that employment in August, 1980. On or about October 29, 1981, Mr. Dughi secured a loan in the amount of $4,500 from First Federal Savings and Loan, and assigned a certificate of deposit he held with First Federal Savings and Loan as collateral. This loan was obtained for the purpose of purchasing an automobile which Mr. Dughi had negotiated to buy from a private individual. After Mr. Dughi had inspected the automobile and decided that it was not to his liking, he met the Respondent on his way home. He had known the Respondent through their employment and had developed a friendship with him. The Respondent went to Mr. Dughi's home where Mr. Dughi informed him what had occurred regarding the automobile purchase. In an effort to avoid any interest expense on the loan, Mr. Dughi gave to the Respondent the $4,500 check from First Federal Savings and Loan, which represented the loan proceeds, and asked the Respondent to deposit it as repayment of the loan through the Respondent's Mandarin Branch office. Mr. Dughi first became aware that his loan had not been repaid approximately 18 months later when he received a notice from First Federal Savings and Loan that he must pay $1,000 in interest in order to renew the loan. In response to this notice, Mr. Dughi contacted Don Perry, a vice-president of First Federal Savings and Loan, and requested the matter be investigated. Mr. Perry testified and produced the original documents involving the transaction between Mr. Dughi and First Federal Savings and Loan. The check initially payable to Mr. Dughi in the amount of $4,500 shows that part of the initial endorsement was removed from the check and subsequently signed and endorsed by the Respondent, as follows: "Pay to the Order of Robert E. Hough". The check was deposited at the Respondent's Mandarin Branch office, into the Respondent's personal account. Subsequently, a check was drawn on the Respondent's account in the amount of $4,200 and deposited in an account with the American National Bank which was owned by the Respondent. At no time did Mr. Dughi authorize the Respondent to deposit his funds or to convert the funds to his personal use. Hazel M. Smith is an individual who maintained a savings account with the Mandarin Branch of the First Federal Savings and Loan Association. On or about November 15, 1979, the Respondent entered into a transaction with Mrs. Smith in which he obtained $10,000 from her account on his representation to her that a special program was being offered to certain preferred customers of First Federal Savings and Loan. However, the money from Mrs. Smith's account was immediately deposited into the personal account of the Respondent. He then obtained a loan in the amount of $10,000 from First Federal Savings and Loan, using the deposit from Mrs. Smith's account as collateral. Thereafter, monthly payments in the amount of $132.16 drawn on the Respondent's account at the American National Bank were deposited in Mrs. Smith's account at First Federal Savings and Loan, in keeping with the terms of the agreement in which Mrs. Smith was to receive repayment over a ten-year period at a ten percent interest rate. As a result of this transaction between the Respondent and Hazel Smith, the Respondent was arrested, and by information filed on October 29, 1981, he was charged with grand theft in violation of Section 812.014, Florida Statutes. On May 3, 1982, the Respondent pled guilty to this criminal charge. Thereafter, the Respondent was adjudicated guilty and sentenced to Florida State Prison for a period of 30 months. Mr. Perry testified regarding the investigation that had been conducted by First Federal Savings and Loan concerning a check "kiting" scheme involving the Respondent, going back to April 25, 1978. This scheme continued until the Respondent resigned from First Federal Savings and Loan in May, 1981, by which time it was determined that the Respondent had secured the sum of $20,100. The Respondent had "kited" checks through three financial institutions, First Federal Savings and Loan, Atlantic National Bank, and the American National Bank. The scheme was uncovered on May 27, 1981, when a check for $20,100 was returned because of insufficient funds. As a result of these transactions, the Respondent was arrested and an Information was filed by the Office of the State Attorney on October 29, 1981, charging the Respondent with grand theft in violation of Section 812.014, Florida Statutes. On May 3, 1982, the Respondent pled guilty to these offenses; subsequently he was adjudicated guilty and sentenced to a five- year period of probation to be served consecutive to the prior 30-month sentence in the Florida State Prison. The Respondent's employment with the Duval County School System was terminated on May 20, 1982.

Recommendation From the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that Teaching Certificate Number 313219 held by the Respondent, Robert Edwin Hough, be REVOKED permanently. THIS RECOMMENDED ORDER entered this 25th day of July, 1983, in Tallahassee, Florida. WILLIAM B. THOMAS Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 904/488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 25th day of July, 1983. COPIES FURNISHED: L. Haldane Taylor, Esquire 1902 Independence Square Jacksonville, Florida 32202 Mr. Robert E. Hough Post Office Box 229 Lawtey, Florida Donald L. Greisheimer Director Education Practices Commission 125 Knott Building Tallahassee, Florida 32301

Florida Laws (2) 120.57812.014
# 1
GILBERT GRIFFIN vs BANK OF AMERICA, 13-002960 (2013)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Lauderdale Lakes, Florida Aug. 12, 2013 Number: 13-002960 Latest Update: Sep. 30, 2019

The Issue Whether Respondents committed the unlawful employment practices alleged in the Charges of Discrimination filed with the Florida Commission on Human Relations ("FCHR") and, if so, what relief should Petitioner be granted.

Findings Of Fact Petitioner is an African-American male. Randstad is an employment services provider that assists clients with the placement of qualified candidates for available employment positions. BOA is a national financial institution. Randstad Petitioner applied for a Mortgage Customer Service Position that Randstad posted in August 2012. Petitioner was not hired for the position. Minda Hampel, an assistant branch manager for Randstad, testified that Randstad does not place candidates in every job that it posts. Ranstad's business records show a Mortgage Customer Service position was posted in August 2012; however, there are no facts or information contained in Randstad's business records to demonstrate that it assisted the hiring employer in filling or placing a candidate in that position. Ms. Hampel credibly testified that she had never met or spoken with Petitioner, and, therefore, was unaware of his race when the Mortgage Customer Service position was posted in August 2012. In October 2012, Randstad assisted one of its clients, MDVIP, with filling an available Purchasing Specialist Position. Petitioner applied for the position. Josh Rabine, a Randstad employee, credibly testified that, when Petitioner applied for the position, Mr. Rabine was unaware of Petitioner's race. Mr. Rabine further testified credibly that Petitioner did not meet the minimum qualifications for the position and that another applicant, who possessed over ten years of experience in purchasing management, was qualified for the position. Mr. Rabine did not decide which candidate would be awarded the position, and, ultimately, the position was filled by one of MDVIP's internal candidates. In November 2012, Ranstad assisted one of its clients, CWB Home Solutions, with filling an available position as an Outside Sales Manager. The position required prior experience with sales of audiovisual equipment and home systems. Petitioner applied for the position. Chelsea Arnold, a staffing manager for Randstad, credibly testified that Petitioner did not meet the minimum qualifications for the position. Ms. Arnold further testified that of the 12 applicants for the position, another individual was chosen who possessed over ten years' experience selling audiovisual and video equipment and home integrating security systems. Ms. Arnold credibly testified that she was unaware of Petitioner's race and that the client, CWB Home Solutions, ultimately made the decision to hire the alternative candidate. Bank of America On November 2, 2012, and January 4, 2013, Petitioner submitted online applications for Mortgage Loan Specialist ("MLS") positions with BOA in Boca Raton and Palm Beach Gardens. BOA's online application system is race-neutral. Petitioner did not identify his race on his online applications. Jorge Trujillo, the BOA corporate recruiter for the above-referenced positions, credibly testified that he has never met nor spoken with Petitioner. Mr. Trujillo testified that BOA was seeking candidates with sales experience, mortgage sales experience, and relational ties to the respective communities. Additionally, as the positions were located in South Florida, it was desirable for the candidate to be bilingual. The 2012 position was not filled because BOA cancelled the requisition.1/ Concerning the remaining MLS position, 31 candidates applied. Petitioner was not hired for the position. Petitioner had never worked in the Boca Raton or Palm Beach area and did not possess any mortgage sales experience. Mr. Trujillo testified that the candidate who was hired was an internal BOA candidate who had progressed from teller to personal banker and possessed relational connections with existing customers, as well as in the surrounding market. The hired candidate was bilingual (Creole), and African- American. Mr. Trujillo credibly testified that neither he nor anyone else involved in the hiring process was aware of Petitioner's race or that Petitioner had previously asserted a discrimination claim against BOA. Petitioner Petitioner failed to present any persuasive evidence that Respondents were aware of his race during the application process for any of the above-referenced positions. Petitioner failed to present any evidence regarding his employment qualifications in general or as specifically related to the above-referenced positions. Indeed, Petitioner's only evidence in this regard is his bald assertion that he was qualified for the positions to which he applied. Petitioner failed to present any evidence that he was equally or more qualified than the candidates hired for the above-referenced positions. Petitioner also failed to present any evidence that the above-referenced positions that he applied for remained open or were filled with individuals outside his protected class. The entirety of Petitioner's evidence in support of a retaliatory motive is set forth below: . . . it's been two years since I've been unemployed, seeking employment, and every position that I applied for or that I'm qualified for for different companies have pretty much sent automated response stating that we filled the position, and, for one person to apply for that many jobs for a long period of time, I feel that I'm being retaliated against, and I also was abused. Randstad and Bank of America refused to hire me and denied me of a job opportunity for positions that I'm qualified for. Ranstad also stated that there are other qualified applicants more qualified and they hired them instead of me, which is the statement that I'm making that I'm being retaliated against for full-time jobs that I'm qualified for. And, again, like I said before, a two-year gap in my employment is a sign of retaliation. The undersigned finds that Petitioner failed to present any credible evidence of a causal connection between BOA's failure-to-hire Petitioner and his previously asserted claim of discrimination.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Florida Commission on Human Relations enter a final order adopting the Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law contained in this Recommended Order. Further, it is RECOMMENDED that the final order dismiss the respective Petitions for Relief against Respondents. DONE AND ENTERED this 12th day of December, 2013, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S TODD P. RESAVAGE 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 12th day of December, 2013.

CFR (1) 29 CFR 1601.70 Florida Laws (7) 120.569120.57120.68509.092760.01760.10760.11
# 4
DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE AND TREASURER vs. LARRY NATHAN BOOKER, 87-001419 (1987)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 87-001419 Latest Update: Aug. 04, 1987

Findings Of Fact Respondent Larry Nathan Booker is presently employed as an office manager for an insurance agent in Jay, Florida. At all times pertinent to this proceeding, he has been licensed by Petitioner as an Ordinary Life including Health agent (Testimony of Respondent, Stipulation). On June 21, 1985, in Case No. 85-00077 in The United States District Court for the Southern District of Alabama, Respondent pleaded guilty and was found guilty to a violation of 18 United States Code, Section 656, as charged in Count One of the information. Count One of the information contained the following allegations: At all times material to this information Larry N. Booker, served in the capacity of manager of the Flomaton Branch, United Bank of Atmore, Flomaton, Alabama. At all times material to this information, the deposits of the United Bank of Atmore were insured by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation - charter number 0058-2 dated December 23, 1969. At all times material to this information, Larry N. Booker had open a personal checking account number 02111607 with the United Bank of Atmore. At all times material to this information, Ronald E. Watkins was doing Business as Watkins Cars-Trucks, 726 Highway 90-West, Milton, Florida and Ronald E. Watkins had open a checking account with the United Bank of Atmore. On or about the 17th day of December, 1982, Larry N. Booker, the then manager of the Flomaton Branch, United Bank of Atmore, with the intent to injure and defraud the United Bank of Atmore did knowingly and willfully misapply $2,333.33 of the funds of the United Bank of Atmore. Larry N. Booker did knowingly and wilfully misapply the $2,333.33 by crediting his personal account with a debit from the account of Watkins Cars-Trucks, at the time of debit the Watkins Cars-Trucks account was in an overdrawn status and Larry N. Booker knew that the Watkins Cars-Trucks account was in an overdrawn status; all in violation of 18 United States Code, Section 656. Respondent was placed on probation for a period of five years, and required to make restitution in the amount of $2,333.33, and to pay a personal note that he had with the United Bank of Atmore. (Petitioner's Composite Exhibit 1) In explanation of his conviction, Respondent testified that in order to assist Ronald E. Watkins in keeping his rental business property from being sold by his landlord, Respondent purchased the property in his name with four investors to hold the mortgage to the property. The arrangement was for Watkins to pay Respondent rent on the property and Respondent would subsequently make payment of the rental amount to the investors under a lease-purchase agreement at a monthly payment of $2,333.33. The payment was made on an automatic debit from Watkins' bank account to Respondent's bank account. Respondent further testified that the overdraft occurred due to the fact that Watkins came into the bank between 1:30 and 2:00 p.m., paid off some of his floor plan loans to tellers, and then went directly to Respondent's assistant to work up new additional floor plan loans to offset the checks that he had just given. However, by the time the loans were prepared and signed, it was after 2:00 p.m., which was the cut-off time for bookkeeping transactions. Therefore, the overdraft in question occurred even though it was automatically covered the next day. Respondent testified that such overdrafts are a common occurrence in the banking system and that, at no time did he have an intent to defraud the bank, nor did it lose any money as a result of the overdraft. (Testimony of Respondent)

USC (1) 18 U. S. C. 656 Florida Laws (2) 626.611626.621
# 6
NELSON RAMIREZ vs ORANGE CO FALCON TRACE PARTNERS LTD ET AL, 20-000743 (2020)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Altamonte Springs, Florida Feb. 12, 2020 Number: 20-000743 Latest Update: Jan. 11, 2025
# 7
CAPITAL PROPERTIES GROUP, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS, 99-003600BID (1999)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Fort Myers, Florida Aug. 26, 1999 Number: 99-003600BID Latest Update: Oct. 09, 2000

The Issue The issue for disposition in this proceeding is whether the Department of Corrections acted fraudulently, arbitrarily, illegally, or dishonestly when it rejected all bids in lease no. 700:0820.

Findings Of Fact On or about May 9, 1999, the Department of Corrections (DOC or agency) issued a request for proposals (RFP) for the agency's Probation and Parole Office in Fort Myers, Florida (lease no. 700:0820). The RFP sought approximately 5225 square feet of space, plus or minus 3 percent. The RFP required that bidders indicate in their proposals whether the space being offered was within one quarter mile of the following: a school for children in grade 12 or lower, a licensed day care facility, a park or playground, a nursing home, a convalescent center, a hospital, an association for disabled population, a mental health center, a youth center, or a group home for disabled population. Two proposals were submitted: one from Capital Properties Group, Inc. (Capital), and one from Offilock, Inc. (Offilock), the entity currently providing office space for the Probation and Parole Office. Both bids were found to be responsive and were evaluated on or about July 7, 1999. According to the RFP criteria the evaluation team considered the following: fiscal costs (base and options period rental rate), moving costs, location (including proxmity to the Justice Center, public transportation, and clients, as well as security issues), and the facility (layout and future expansion). Offilock's bid included lease rates higher than the rates set for the geographical region by the Department of Management Services (DMS). Capital's bid provided lease rates at the highest end of DMS' rates. While DOC is required to consider DMS' rates, it is not bound by those rates and higher rates would not automatically disqualify a bidder. Still, DOC was concerned with reducing its office lease costs either by reducing the rental rates or by reducing the space requirements. The agency had hoped to obtain a lease rate at the low-to-mid range of DMS' rates. The evaluation committee rated Capital higher than Offilock in the fiscal category but substantially lower than Offilock in the remaining categories. The final scores for the two bidders were Capital: 242; Offilock: 328. In its response to the question described in paragraph 2, above, regarding location, Capital indicated that its space is within one quarter mile of a school for children in grade 12 or lower. It responded "no," as to the other facilities. Offilock's space is not within one quarter mile of any of the facilities. During site visits DOC staff noted that Capital's building abutts a school for children in grades pre-kindergarten through eight, with a playground approximately 30 feet from the proposed office. Across the street from the building is another school for elementary through high-school children. Also across the street is a church with a children's outdoor play area. The office which is the subject of lease no. 700:0820 serves approximately 1100 felony probationers, including sexual offenders, drug offenders, and other felons. Most are required to report to the office at least once a month. Nothing in the RFP for lease no. 700:820 specifies that a property will be disqualified because of proximity to a school or other facility listed in paragraph 2 above. Instead, Section 945.28, Florida Statutes, requires that the DOC provide newspaper notice and written notice to the county or city manager whenever the agency intends to lease or purchase probation and parole office space. DOC complied with this requirement. Before any complaints were received, on July 13, 1999, DOC General Services Manager Malcolm Wilson sent a letter to both Capital and Offilock stating that the agency was rejecting all bids for this project as not being in the best interests of the State of Florida. The letter thanked the bidders and stated they would be given an opportunity to bid on a new package. Although there was some concern initially that Capital's property might not be zoned for a probation and parole office, that concern was eliminated with a letter from the Lee County Department of Community Development. In their testimony at hearing and in their pre- rejection internal memoranda, DOC staff explained that the bases for rejecting all bids were lease costs and the immediate proximity of Capital's offered property to schools and playgrounds. The staff responsible for the decision in lease no. 700:0820 were concerned about public safety and negative responses by the community. In other similar cases in the past the agency has experienced objections by the community. Since July 1999, DOC has included in other probation and parole office RFPs the provision that such offices may not be located within one quarter mile of the facilities listed in Section 945.28, Florida Statutes.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing, it is hereby RECOMMENDED: That the protest of Capital Properties Group, Inc., be dismissed. DONE AND ENTERED this 19th day of May, 2000, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. MARY CLARK 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 May, 2000. COPIES FURNISHED: Robert A. Sweetapple, Esquire Sweetapple, Broeker & Varkas 165 East Boca Raton Road Boca Raton, Florida 33432-3911 Obed Dorceus, Esquire Department of Corrections 2601 Blairstone Road Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2500 Louis A. Vargas, General Counsel Department of Corrections 2601 Blairstone Road Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2500 Michael W. Moore, Secretary Department of Corrections 2601 Blairstone Road Tallahassee, Florida 32399-2500

Florida Laws (2) 120.57945.28 Florida Administrative Code (1) 60H-1.029
# 10

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