Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change
Find Similar Cases by Filters
You can browse Case Laws by Courts, or by your need.
Find 49 similar cases
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BOARD OF MASSAGE THERAPY vs STEVEN HENLEY, L.M.T., 19-000269PL (2019)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Panama City, Florida Jan. 16, 2019 Number: 19-000269PL Latest Update: Sep. 24, 2024
# 1
CRIMINAL JUSTICE STANDARDS AND TRAINING COMMISSION vs STEPHEN L. DEMETER, 09-003938PL (2009)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Shalimar, Florida Jul. 22, 2009 Number: 09-003938PL Latest Update: Dec. 03, 2009

The Issue The issues to be determined in this proceeding concern whether the Respondent committed the violations of Sections 943.13(7), 943.1395(7), and 800.03, Florida Statutes, and Florida Administrative Code Rule 11B-27.0011(4)b, concerning the licensure qualification of good moral character.

Findings Of Fact The Petitioner is an agency of the State of Florida, charged, as pertinent, with licensure and regulation of the practice standards and practice of certified law enforcement officers, in the manner prescribed by Chapter 943, Florida Statutes. The Respondent was certified as a Law Enforcement Officer on May 8, 1995, and issued Certification Number 155216. The Respondent was a Fire Chief in Gulf Breeze, Florida, at times pertinent to this proceeding. On June 21, 2008, the Respondent went to the Edge of Paradise Day Spa (the Spa) as a customer seeking a massage. He arrived at about 5:45 p.m. The Spa is owned by Ms. Vickie Edge. She holds a Massage Establishment License and a Facial Specialist License issued by the State of Florida. The business is located in Destin, Florida, on Highway 98. It offers its customers massage therapy and various beauty treatments. It employed Jennifer Edwards, a state-licensed massage therapist, on June 21, 2008. Because he did not have an appointment, the Respondent had to wait until the massage therapist, Ms. Edwards, returned from a meal break. During this time he conversed with the owner, Ms. Edge, while he completed a "new customer form." The Respondent is a public servant and did not want his identity associated with patronizing a massage establishment. Ms. Edge assured him that customers often did not use their true identities, in completing the form, for this reason. The Respondent therefore entered a fictitious name, "Jim Martin" on the form, also stating that he was from Ohio. He told Ms. Edge that he was a guest at a nearby Days Inn motel and was in the area on business, working on a “Networking” job for a Pensacola bank. The customer form contained a notice to the effect that removal of all clothing was not required, that body parts not being massaged would be covered by a large sheet or towel, and that “. . . no reputable massage therapist will ever touch you in a sexual way.” The Respondent signed the form, with the fictitious name and phone number, and paid Ms. Edge a cash fee of $75.00 for a 60-minute massage. The massage therapist, Ms. Edwards, returned to the spa at about 6:10 p.m., accompanied by her friend, Karen Arrington. She met the Respondent (for the first time) and then went to the massage room to prepare for the Respondent’s massage. About five minutes later she showed the Respondent to the massage room. She told him to undress and lie face down on the massage table under a twin-size bed sheet. She told him to thus cover his "private areas" and to tuck the sheet under his hips. The Respondent agreed and, while Ms. Edwards was out of the room, he disrobed. After several minutes, Ms. Edwards knocked on the door and re-entered the room, finding the Respondent lying face down under the bed sheet. He was nude, except for the sheet covering him. Ms. Edwards pulled the sheet down to his lower back and began massaging his lower back, keeping his buttocks covered by the sheet. During this process the Respondent pulled the sheet down, exposing his buttocks. Ms. Edwards replaced the sheet, admonishing him to keep that area covered. Upon finishing with his back, Ms. Edwards told the Respondent to roll over and lie on his back while she continued with the massage. He was covered from the top of his back downward while this change of position was made. Ms. Edwards then continued with the massage. While thus lying on his back, the Respondent pulled the sheet down, exposing his erect penis to Ms. Edwards while she was about three feet away. She testified that she had never before seen a man’s penis like that, in that there was ". . . excess skin over the top of his penis." The Respondent acknowledged in testimony that he is uncircumcised. While thus exposed, the Respondent began to apparently masturbate, using his hand. Ms. Edwards was about three feet away at the time. She did not consent to this conduct and was very upset by such an act in front of her. Ms. Edwards ran out of the room and to the lobby area and told Ms. Edge that the Respondent was "back there jerking off.” She also told Ms. Arrington, and told her to call the police. The Respondent then dressed and came into the lobby. Ms. Edwards yelled at him that the spa was a respectable establishment and that the police were being called. Ms. Edwards tried to block his exit, but the Respondent fled the building at this point. Ms. Edwards followed him. Ms. Arrington was already outside speaking with the “911” operator on her cell phone. Ms. Arrington grabbed the Respondent by the shirt and confronted him, at which point he pushed her to the ground and fled on foot down the sidewalk along Highway 98. He left his car in the spa parking lot. Ms. Edwards and Ms. Arrington followed the Respondent, calling to him to stop and that the police were on their way. Ms. Arrington stopped and picked up a beer bottle and broke it, carrying it with her to use as a weapon. She testified that she feared the Respondent might do her violence if she confronted him. The chase continued for more than one-half mile. A deputy sheriff arrived and Ms. Arrington pointed out the Respondent. The deputy took him into custody. On his own volition, the Respondent told the deputy that he had scratched himself during a massage and the masseuse had gone “ballistic.” The Respondent stated that he had done nothing wrong. When the officer asked him why he fled, he replied that one of the women was throwing bottles at him. Both Ms. Edwards and Ms. Arrington wrote witness statements for the deputy. In testimony, Ms. Edwards described the Respondent’s act verbally and with an illustrative hand motion. She did not describe the duration of the act, as she observed it. The Respondent maintained that he was doing no such act, but rather was scratching himself because the sheet caused him to itch. The Respondent used false identification information when he went to the spa because he is a public servant (fire chief) and did not want adverse publicity associated with his paying for a massage during a time when employees were subject to lay-offs due to shrinking budgets. He did not flee in his car because he did not want his identity to become known through means of his tag number.

Recommendation Having considered the foregoing Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, the record evidence and the pleadings and arguments of the parties, it is Recommended that a Final Order be entered by the Criminal Justice Standards and Training Commission, revoking the Respondent’s Law Enforcement Certification, Number 155216. DONE AND ENTERED this 3rd day of December, 2009, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S P. MICHAEL RUFF 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 3rd day of December, 2009. COPIES FURNISHED: Joseph S. White, Esquire Department of Law Enforcement Post Office Box 1489 Tallahassee, Florida 32302 Gene Mitchell, Esquire 2101 North 9th Street Pensacola, Florida 32502 Michael Ramage, General Counsel Florida Department of Law Enforcement Post Office Box 1489 Tallahassee, Florida 32302 Gerald M. Bailey, Commissioner Florida Department of Law Enforcement Post Office Box 1489 Tallahassee, Florida 32302

Florida Laws (7) 120.569120.57800.03943.13943.133943.139943.1395 Florida Administrative Code (1) 11B-27.0011
# 3
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BOARD OF MASSAGE THERAPY vs MICHAEL T. CORONEOS, L.M.T., 18-004513PL (2018)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Daytona Beach, Florida Aug. 28, 2018 Number: 18-004513PL Latest Update: Apr. 05, 2019

The Issue The issues presented in this case are whether Respondent has violated the provisions of chapters 456 and 480, Florida Statutes, as alleged in the Administrative Complaint; and, if so, what penalty should be imposed.

Findings Of Fact The following findings of fact are based on the testimony, evidence admitted at the formal hearing, and the agreed facts in the pre-hearing stipulation. The Department is the state agency charged with regulating the practice of massage therapy pursuant to section 20.43, Florida Statutes, and chapters 456 and 480. At all times material to the allegations in this case, Respondent was licensed to practice as a massage therapist in the State of Florida, having been issued license number MA 79509. At all times material to the allegations in this matter, Respondent was employed as a massage therapist at Daytona College, in Daytona Beach, Florida. Respondent’s address of record is 10 Spanish Pine Way, Ormond Beach, Florida 32174. S.W. is a licensed mental health counselor who has been licensed for approximately 22 years. She resides in Clermont, Florida, which is where she lived at the time of the massage. In July 2017, S.W. and C.W., her 23-year-old daughter, traveled to the Daytona Beach area to visit S.W.’s elderly mother. On July 19, 2017, S.W. and C.W. went to Daytona College, for the first time, for a massage. Upon arriving at the school, they were greeted by the receptionist. S.W. and C.W. were scheduled for 80-minute massages to take place at 3:30 p.m. However, the ladies arrived ten minutes late, so the massages began late. Upon arrival, the ladies were asked whether they needed to use the restroom, which they did. After using the restroom, the ladies were taken to the massage area for their services. S.W. selected the male massage therapist based on her past positive experiences with male therapists. S.W. had received a number of massages in the past, including massages by men. She allowed her daughter to be scheduled with the female massage therapist because she believed her daughter preferred a woman. S.W. was scheduled for a massage with Respondent, and C.W. was scheduled with Elizabeth Branson. Respondent escorted S.W. to the massage room first. Ms. Branson escorted C.W. to the room a few minutes later. As Respondent escorted S.W. to the massage room, S.W. described the areas in which she wanted special attention, including her neck, shoulders, scalp, and feet. Respondent asked S.W. whether she needed massage in the sciatic area. S.W. had problems in the sciatic area, so she consented to have the area massaged. The common room where massages occurred at Daytona College contained eight massage tables separated by curtains. Respondent took S.W. into the massage room and instructed her to undress to her comfort level. Respondent left the room while S.W. undressed down to her underwear. When Respondent reentered the room, S.W. was draped with a sheet. Respondent tucked the drape into S.W.’s underwear and lowered it onto her buttocks. A short time later, S.W. could hear her daughter in the area near her, but she could not see her. C.W. whispered to S.W. to let her know she was in the room. At some point, S.W. heard her daughter exit the room. C.W. finished her massage before S.W., even though S.W.’s service began before C.W.’s. C.W. recalled that her mother was unusually quiet during the massage instead of being “chatty,” as she normally would be. C.W. waited in the hallway outside the massage room for four or five minutes for S.W.’s massage to finish. After S.W. came out of the massage room, C.W. immediately noticed that something was wrong. When S.W. exited the room, she was “wired” and not relaxed, as she would normally appear after a massage. C.W. described her as appearing nervous and agitated. C.W. could tell that something was wrong, but S.W. did not say anything at that time. The two ladies walked to the front desk. As was her routine, S.W. paid for both massages and left a $10 tip. She did not make a complaint regarding the massage with the receptionist before leaving the school. Concerned regarding her mother’s behavior, C.W. asked S.W. what happened. S.W. stated that something weird happened. The ladies left the school and began driving to their destination. S.W. continued to be upset and ultimately, began crying. She was so upset that initially, she could not articulate what occurred. S.W. ultimately told C.W. that Respondent had placed his hand under her underwear and touched her clitoris. S.W. contacted her friend Mike, a law enforcement officer. S.W. explained to Mike what happened, and he suggested that she contact the police to report what happened to her. S.W. and C.W. called the police and requested that an officer meet the ladies at Daytona College. They also contacted the school and advised them that S.W. had been inappropriately touched during her massage. They arrived back at the school approximately 20 minutes later. The officer arrived shortly after S.W. and C.W. The officer interviewed S.W. and she reported to him that while massaging her thighs, Respondent “grazed” her vaginal area with his finger. S.W. also reported that Respondent touched her clitoris with his finger. S.W. declined to pursue criminal charges and stated she would file a complaint with the Department. However, she expressed that she wanted to ensure there was a record of the incident so another woman would not have the same experience. On or about July 26, 2017, one week later, S.W. filed a complaint with the Department of Health. S.W. submitted a typewritten statement regarding the events involving Respondent. S.W. related that at the beginning of the massage, she gave Respondent permission to pull down her underwear and tuck in the drape. She stated that toward the end of the massage, Respondent “grazed” her vagina outside her underwear. He then placed his finger under her underwear and began massaging her clitoris for a couple of seconds. She stated that she grabbed Respondent’s hand and pushed it away. In response, Respondent abruptly told S.W. that the massage was done. In addition to the report to the police and the Department, S.W. also reported the incident to the school administrators, Dr. Ali and Mr. Brooks. Dr. Ali met with S.W. and C.W. when they returned to the school. Dr. Ali described S.W. as appearing embarrassed, subdued, and uncomfortable. Mr. Brooks was also present during the meeting. He was called to campus after he received a report that something inappropriate happened. He observed that S.W. appeared upset. Although there was no expert offered to testify in this matter, Chris Brooks, LMT, provided insight regarding the type of massage provided to S.W. He explained the difference between sensualized touch and sexualized touch. A sensualized touch is not uncommon in massage. On the other hand, sexualized touch is used to evoke sexual pleasure. At hearing, S.W. was clear and unwavering in her recollection of the events involving Respondent touching her vaginal area. S.W. appeared anxious, uncomfortable, and her voice cracked when she testified that Respondent moved her underwear and touched her vaginal area. Specifically, she testified that Respondent grazed her vagina on top of the front of her underwear. She was in such shock that it happened she could not say anything. Respondent then put a bare finger underneath her underwear and began massaging her clitoris. She still could not speak, so she quickly grabbed his hand and pushed it away. Consistent with her statement to the police officer and her written statement, she credibly testified that Respondent touched her vaginal area with his finger. At hearing, Respondent denied touching S.W.’s vagina during the massage. He also denied rubbing her clitoris. Mr. Brooks, who is personally and professionally acquainted with Respondent, testified that Respondent seemed shocked to learn of S.W.’s complaint. Respondent testified that he draped S.W.’s legs in such a way that it caused the draping to “bunch” between the area massaged and the genitalia. Respondent argues that S.W. could not determine whether the draping touched her genitals when Respondent massaged her legs. However, when pressed on this point, S.W. unequivocally testified that she was certain it was Respondent’s finger that touched her clitoris. Respondent had no prior complaints of inappropriate touching before S.W.’s complaint. Although Mr. Brooks asked him about the complaint on the date of the incident, there was no evidence offered at hearing that Respondent was formally interviewed by the school administration. However, Respondent was terminated from his job at Daytona College based on S.W.’s complaint. Respondent was also not interviewed by the police officer investigating the complaint. Respondent was not charged with a crime. Respondent has no prior disciplinary action involving his license to practice massage therapy. The evidence demonstrates that Respondent crossed the boundaries of appropriate massage into sexual misconduct when he massaged S.W.’s clitoris with his finger. While Respondent’s testimony seemed sincere, S.W. was more persuasive. Based on the totality of the evidence presented at hearing, there is clear and convincing evidence that Respondent touched S.W.’s vaginal area or clitoris with his finger. The placement of a massage therapist’s finger on the vaginal area or clitoris of a patient is outside the scope of the professional practice of massage therapy.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Board of Massage Therapy enter a final order finding: Respondent guilty of violating sections 480.046(1)(p) and 480.0485 as further defined in rule 64B7-26.010; Imposing a fine of $2,500; and Revoking Respondent’s license to practice massage therapy. DONE AND ENTERED this 5th day of April, 2019, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S YOLONDA Y. GREEN 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 5th day of April, 2019.

Florida Laws (5) 120.569120.5720.43480.046480.0485 Florida Administrative Code (2) 64B7-26.01064B7-30.002 DOAH Case (1) 18-4513PL
# 4
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BOARD OF MASSAGE THERAPY vs FUNU WEN, LMT, 16-003986PL (2016)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Orlando, Florida Jul. 18, 2016 Number: 16-003986PL Latest Update: Sep. 24, 2024
# 5
# 8
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BOARD OF MASSAGE THERAPY vs SHUFANG LI, L.M.T., 18-000898PL (2018)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Miami, Florida Feb. 16, 2018 Number: 18-000898PL Latest Update: Jun. 25, 2019

The Issue The issues to be determined are whether Respondent engaged in sexual misconduct in the practice of massage therapy in violation of section 480.0485, Florida Statutes, or in the practice of a health profession, in violation of section 456.072(1)(v), Florida Statutes; and, if so, what is the appropriate sanction.

Findings Of Fact The Department, Board of Massage Therapy, is the state agency charged with regulating the practice of massage therapy in the state of Florida, pursuant to section 20.43 and chapters 456 and 480, Florida Statutes. At all times material to this proceeding, Ms. Li was a licensed massage therapist in the state of Florida, holding license number MA82765. Ms. Li's current address of record is 620 East Colonial Drive, Orlando, Florida 32803. Ms. Li's native language is Mandarin Chinese. She came to the United States from China in 2014, and her ability to communicate in English is limited. On November 16, 2016, Ms. Li was employed by Empire Day Spa (Empire), located in Lake Worth, Florida. On that day, Detective Avidon, as part of the City of Lake Worth Community Policing Street Crimes Unit, was participating in an ongoing investigation into possible prostitution. He entered Empire in an undercover capacity and was greeted by Ms. Li. Detective Avidon asked her how much it would be for a one-hour massage. Ms. Li advised him it cost $70. Detective Avidon asked Ms. Li if she would give him a "full service" massage, which, from his experience in investigating vice, he understood to be a phrase commonly used to refer to the performance of sexual acts during or after a massage. As he testified, Ms. Li took Detective Avidon into an enclosed hallway to the left of the counter, where she told him he would have to pay extra money. Ms. Li then led him to a massage room. Later in the massage room, Detective Avidon asked her, "how much?" Ms. Li came over to him, rubbed his upper thigh just below the genital area, gestured as if she were performing masturbation, and asked him, "you want?" As he testified, Detective Avidon, using a slang term for oral sex, then asked Ms. Li, "How much for a blow job?" Ms. Li answered, "You tell me." Detective Avidon then asked, "Sixty?" Ms. Li responded, "One hundred." Detective Avidon confirmed, "One hundred dollars?" Ms. Li said, "Yes." Detective Avidon told Ms. Li he needed to put his phone and wallet in his car and exited Empire. Detectives already on scene then entered Empire along with Detective Avidon. Ms. Li was positively identified by Detective Avidon, and she was placed into custody. Ms. Li was later formally identified using the Florida Driver's license in her possession. Detective Avidon shortly thereafter completed the probable cause affidavit, which later was introduced into evidence to supplement and explain his live testimony at hearing. Ms. Li's contrary testimony, to the effect that while she was in the massage room with Detective Avidon, she did not agree to engage in sexual activity, was not credible and is rejected. While it is accepted that Ms. Li's ability to communicate in English is limited, the credible testimony of Detective Avidon as to all the circumstances surrounding their communications makes it very clear that Ms. Li completely understood that she was agreeing to engage in sexual activity in exchange for payment. Ms. Li's actions on November 16, 2016, were outside the scope of practice of massage therapy. Ms. Li used the massage therapist-patient relationship to attempt to engage Detective Avidon in sexual activity. Ms. Li engaged in sexual misconduct in the practice of massage therapy. Ms. Li has never had any prior discipline imposed against her license.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Department of Health, Board of Massage Therapy, enter a final order finding Ms. Shufang Li in violation of sections 480.0485 and 456.072(1)(v), Florida Statutes, constituting grounds for discipline under section 480.046(1)(p); imposing a fine of $2,500; revoking her license to practice massage therapy; and imposing costs of investigation and prosecution. DONE AND ENTERED this 18th day of May, 2018, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S F. SCOTT BOYD 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 18th day of May, 2018. COPIES FURNISHED: Gennaro Cariglio, Jr., Esquire Law Office of Gennaro Cariglio, Jr. Penthouse 701 8101 Biscayne Boulevard Miami, Florida 33138 (eServed) Lealand L. McCharen, Esquire Gerald C. Henley, II, Esquire Department of Health 4052 Bald Cypress Way, Bin C-65 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3265 (eServed) Nichole C. Geary, General Counsel Department of Health 4052 Bald Cypress Way, Bin A-02 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1701 (eServed) Kama Monroe, Executive Director Board of Massage Therapy Department of Health 4052 Bald Cypress Way, Bin C-06 Tallahassee, Florida 32399-3257 (eServed)

Florida Laws (7) 120.57456.063456.072456.073456.079480.046480.0485
# 9
DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BOARD OF MASSAGE THERAPY vs LI ZHAO, LMT, 19-000076PL (2019)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Altamonte Springs, Florida Jan. 07, 2019 Number: 19-000076PL Latest Update: Sep. 24, 2024
# 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