Belleau v. State, Dept. of Environmental Protection
| Decision Date | 27 June 1997 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 96-2470,96-2493,s. 96-2470 |
| Citation | 695 So.2d 1305 |
| Parties | 22 Fla. L. Weekly D1576 George A. and Ann F. BELLEAU, Crown Laundry & Dry Cleaners, Inc., and Crown Management Services, Inc., Appellants, v. STATE of Florida, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, Appellee, JURA SERVICES, INC., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Derek B. Spilman and John W. Wilcox of Akerman, Senterfitt & Eidson, P.A., Tampa, for Appellants George A. and Ann F. Belleau, Crown Laundry & Dry Cleaners, Inc. and Crown Management Services, Inc.
Thomas M. DeRose and R. Scott Ruth of Hopping Green Sams & Smith, P.A., Tallahassee, for Appellant Jura Services, Inc.
Jack Chisolm and David Thulman, Assistant General Counsels, Department of Environmental Protection, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
These two appeals are from a final order entered by the Secretary of the Department of Environmental Protection, which found appellants liable for a corrective action order and investigatory costs in connection with perchlorethylene (PCE) contamination of a monitoring well. More specifically, the Secretary found appellants George A. and Ann F. Belleau, Crown Laundry & Dry Cleaners, Inc., and Crown Management Services, Inc., jointly and severally liable for violations of section 403.161(1)(a) and (b), Florida Statutes (1985), and for investigative costs under section 403.141(1), Florida Statutes (1985). She further found the above appellants along with appellant Jura Services, Inc., jointly and severally liable for investigative costs under section 403.727(4), Florida Statutes (1985). We reverse, because the Secretary improperly substituted her judgment for that of the hearing officer on the violation findings, and because the agency failed to provide notice of its intent to seek costs under section 403.727(4).
The hearing officer in this case found that the Department of Environmental Protection failed to adduce evidence sufficient to carry its burden of proving a violation of the groundwater standard for PCE caused by release of PCE from the facility appellants owned and operated. The hearing officer's findings in this regard are supported by competent, substantial evidence in the form of Dr. Mercer's expert testimony. The Secretary's findings and conclusion to the contrary are based on facts contrary to those found by the hearing officer. See Sunshine Jr. Stores, Inc. v. Department of Envtl. Reg., 556 So.2d 1177 (Fla. 1st DCA 1990) (en banc). The law is well established that an agency is bound to honor a hearing officer's findings of fact unless they are not supported by...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
SOUTH FLA. CARGO CARRIERS v. State
...fact were not based on competent substantial evidence." Section 120.57(1)(j), Florida Statutes. Accord Belleau v. Dept. of Environmental Protection, 695 So.2d 1305 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997); Martuccio v. Dept. of Professional Regulation, 622 So.2d 607 (Fla. 1st DCA 1993); Fla. Dept. of Correction......
-
Communications Workers of Am. v. City of Gainesville
...evidence.” City of Winter Springs v. Winter Springs Prof'l, 885 So.2d 494, 497 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004) (citing Belleau v. Dep't of Envtl. Prot., 695 So.2d 1305, 1307 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997)). In reviewing PERC's decisions, moreover, we must not lose sight of the fact that public employees have a co......
-
City of Winter Springs v. WINTER SPRINGS
...a hearing officer's findings of fact unless they are not supported by competent, substantial evidence. Belleau v. Dep't of Environ. Protection, 695 So.2d 1305, 1307 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (citations In the present case, the hearing officer found the prior CBA expressly limited anniversary pay ......
-
B.J. v. Dept. of Children and Family Servs.
...to honor a[n ALJ's] findings of fact unless they are not supported by competent, substantial evidence." Belleau v. Dep't of Envtl. Prot., 695 So.2d 1305, 1307 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997). However, an agency may reject conclusions of law without limitation. Szniatkiewicz v. Unemployment Appeals Comm......