Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
Find Similar Cases by Filters
You can browse Case Laws by Courts, or by your need.
Find 49 similar cases
DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF HOTELS AND RESTAURANTS vs EL CONDOR PLAZA, 07-001702 (2007)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Lauderdale Lakes, Florida Apr. 13, 2007 Number: 07-001702 Latest Update: Sep. 14, 2007

The Issue The issues in this disciplinary proceeding arise from Petitioner's allegation that Respondent, which operates a restaurant, violated several statutes and rules governing food service establishments. If Petitioner proves one or more of the alleged violations, then it will be necessary to consider whether penalties should be imposed on Respondent.

Findings Of Fact At one time, Respondent Sonimar, Inc., d/b/a El Condor Pasa ("Sonimar"), held a Permanent Food Service license. This license expired, however, on December 1, 2005. Thereafter, Sonimar continued to operate a food service establishment without a valid license, and was doing so at all times relevant to this case. Sonimar is subject to the regulatory and disciplinary jurisdiction of Petitioner Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Division of Hotels and Restaurants (the "Division"). On two occasions——June 7, 2006, and July 26, 2006——an agent of the Division inspected a restaurant located at 953 Rock Island Road in North Lauderdale, Florida, which establishment was then (and at the time of the hearing) operated by Sonimar. During each visit, the inspector noticed several items that were not in compliance with the laws which govern the facilities and operations of restaurants. As of July 26, 2006, the following deficiencies subsisted: (1) chlorine sanitizer was not being used to clean food contact surfaces and utensils, in violation of Food Code Rule 4-501.114(A)i; (2) ready-to-eat, potentially hazardous food had been held more than 24 hours with no date marking, in violation of Food Code Rule 3-501.17; (3) the operator of the establishment was not licensed, in violation of Section 509.241(2), Florida Statutesii; (4) some ceiling tiles in the kitchen had water stains (evidencing a leak) and there was a visible hole in the kitchen ceiling, in violation of Florida Administrative Code Rule 61C-1.004(6); (5) the door of the walk- in freezer and the floor of the walk-in cooler were in disrepair, in violation of Food Code Rule 4-501.11; and (6) the plumbing located above the three-compartment sink was leaking, in violation of Food Code Rule 5-205.15.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Division enter a final order: (a) finding Sonimar guilty in accordance with the foregoing Recommended Order; (b) ordering Sonimar to pay an administrative penalty in the amount of $2,800, due and payable to the Division of Hotels and Restaurants, 1940 North Monroe Street, Tallahassee, Florida 32399, within 30 calendar days after the filing of the final order with the agency clerk; and (c) directing Sonimar to send an appropriate principal to an educational program sponsored by the Hospitality Education Program. DONE AND ENTERED this 8th day of August, 2007, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. JOHN G. VAN LANINGHAM 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.stae.fl.us Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 8th day of August, 2007.

Florida Laws (6) 120.569120.57509.241509.261775.082775.083 Florida Administrative Code (2) 61C-1.00461C-4.010
# 7
DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF HOTELS AND RESTAURANTS vs GIGI'S CAFE, 11-002599 (2011)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed:Miami, Florida May 23, 2011 Number: 11-002599 Latest Update: Nov. 12, 2019

The Issue The issue is whether Respondent, in the operation of a public food establishment, is guilty of various violations of the law governing such establishments and, if so, what penalty should be imposed.

Findings Of Fact Gigi's Restaurant, LLC, holds Permanent Food Service license 2331011, which authorizes the operation of a public food establishment at 3585 Northeast 207th Street in Aventura, Florida, and expires October 1, 2011. Respondent last renewed its license on September 21, 2010. On January 13, 2010, at 11:29 a.m., an inspector of Petitioner visited Respondent's public food establishment to perform a routine inspection. At the time, Respondent's license had expired. The inspector also observed, among other things, the following violations: the lack of proper hand-drying provisions at the hand-wash sink; a soiled-interior microwave; an inadequate-strength dishmachine sanitizer; not-sanitized- properly-after-cleaning food-contact surfaces and utensils; and no chemical test kit provided when using chemical sanitizer at three-compartment sink. The inspector notified Respondent that a reinspection would take place on March 13, 2010, at 11:30 a.m. On April 21, 2010, the inspector performed a reinspection of the public food establishment. At the time, Respondent still had not renewed its license. The inspector observed the recurrence or continuation of the following violations: the lack of proper hand-drying provisions at the hand-wash sink; a soiled-interior microwave; an inadequate- strength dishmachine sanitizer; not-sanitized-properly-after- cleaning food-contact surfaces and utensils; and no chemical test kit provided when using chemical sanitizer at three- compartment sink. The five remaining violations cited in the Administrative Complaint are all critical violations. A critical violation is more likely than a noncritical violation to cause food-borne illness.

Recommendation It is RECOMMENDED that the Division of Hotels and Restaurants enter a final order determining that Respondent is guilty of the five violations identified above and revoking the public food establishment license of Respondent. DONE AND ENTERED this 8th day of July, 2011, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. S ROBERT E. MEALE 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 8th day of July, 2011. COPIES FURNISHED: Charles F. Tunnicliff, Esquire Department of Business and Professional Regulation 1940 North Monroe Street, Suite 42 Tallahassee, Florida 32399 Arner Gigi Gigi’s Cafe 3585 Northeast 207 Street, No.C302 Miami, Florida 33180 Layne Smith, General Counsel Department of Business and Professional Regulation 1940 North Monroe Street, Suite 42 Tallahassee, Florida 32399 William L. Veach, Director Department of Business and Professional Regulation 1940 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399

CFR (1) 21 CFR 178.1010 Florida Laws (7) 120.569120.57120.68201.10509.261703.11837.06
# 8
DIVISION OF ALCOHOLIC BEVERAGES AND TOBACCO vs. P AND D, INC., T/A PETE AND LENNY`S, 77-001591 (1977)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 77-001591 Latest Update: Feb. 17, 1978

The Issue By Notice to Show Cause filed August 24, 1977, the Division of Alcoholic Beverages and Tobacco, Petitioner, seeks to revoke, suspend or otherwise discipline the license of P & D, Inc. t/a Pete and Lenny's. As grounds therefor it is alleged that on or about June 29, 1977 Respondent failed to discontinue the sale of alcoholic beverages when the service of full course wools had been discontinued. Three witnesses were called by Petitioner, two witnesses were called by Respondent and one exhibit was admitted into evidence.

Findings Of Fact P & D, Inc. t/a Pete and Lenny's holds a 4 COP special restaurant beverage license and the Hearing Officer has jurisdiction over the parties and the violations alleged. On or about 12:30 a.m. June 29, 1977 beverage agents Meek and Shepherd entered Pete and Lenny's, seated themselves at the bar and ordered drinks. After finishing their drink they ordered a second drink and inquired of the bartender, Richard Bohan, if they could get food. He replied that they could get sandwiches at the Banana Boat next door. Further questioning by the agents elicited responses that Respondent had stopped serving and the cook had been transferred next door, that the Banana Boat served sandwiches until 1:30 a.m., that Respondent usually offered New York strip steaks but "not this late", and that the Banana Boat and Pete and Lenny's were owned by the same corporation. After identifying themselves as beverage agents and asking for the manager, Meek and Shepherd inspected the kitchen and restaurant area. Inspection of the kitchen revealed the only cooking equipment to be a microwave oven, empty icebox at 420 F, no evidence that food had been prepared in the kitchen for several days, insufficient silver to serve 200 diners simultaneously as required by regulations for special restaurant licenses, and musicians instrument cases occupying a substantial portion of the kitchen floor. Unopened boxes of silver was produced from the storeroom in sufficient quantity to meet the minimum requirements of the regulations. Respondent's witnesses testified that the icebox had been inoperative for a day or two and food had been removed to next door, but that they were not refusing to serve full course meals. The only meal offered appears to have been the New York strip steak either cooked next door or in the microwave oven. No facilities were available in the kitchen with which to prepare vegetables and these witnesses testified potato salad was served as the vegetable. Pete and Lenny's is a night club where the music is loud and continuous. When the live band is on break recorded music is provided. On the evening of the inspection by beverage officers Meek and Shepherd little, if any, food had been served in Pete and Lenny's.

Florida Laws (1) 561.20
# 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