Bevis v. Eastland, H-17.

• Decision Date: 28 April 1966
• Docket Number: No. H-17.,H-17.
• Citation: 186 So.2d 818
• Parties: Herman W. BEVIS et al., Individually and As Partners Doing Business under the Firm Name of Price Waterhouse & Co., Petitioners, v. Mark W. EASTLAND, Arthur I. Hemmings, James D.A. Holley, Benjamin E. James and Charles W. Johnson, Jr., As Members of and Constituting the State Board of Accountancy, Etc., Respondents.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

186 So.2d 818

Herman W. BEVIS et al., Individually and As Partners Doing Business under the Firm Name of Price Waterhouse & Co., Petitioners, v. Mark W. EASTLAND, Arthur I. Hemmings, James D.A. Holley, Benjamin E. James and Charles W. Johnson, Jr., As Members of and Constituting the State Board of Accountancy, Etc., Respondents.

No. H-17.

District Court of Appeal of Florida. First District.

April 28, 1966.

Smathers & Thompson, Miami, for petitioners.

Bedell, Bedell, Dittmar & Smith, Jacksonville, for respondents.

RAWLS, Chief Judge.

The partners of Price Waterhouse & Co., an accounting firm, filed their individual applications with the State Board of Accountancy seeking the status of certified public accountants in the State of Florida by reciprocity. Each of the applicants takes the position he is entitled to such status as a matter of law by reason of the provisions of Section 473.19, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., which provides:

"The board may, in its discretion, issue a certificate as a certified public accountant to any applicant who holds a valid and unrevoked certificate as a certified public accountant issued by, or under the authority of, another state or political subdivision of the United States, or who holds a valid and unrevoked certificate as a chartered accountant issued by, or under the authority of, a foreign country; provided, the applicant has complied with the provisions of this chapter and the rules of the board. The board shall not be required to issue any certificate under the provisions of this section unless:

"(1) The original certificate was secured as the result of an examination which in the judgment of the board was the equivalent of the standard established by it, and,

"(2) The applicant has been engaged in the practice of public accountancy in Florida as a full time employee of a certified public accountant, as defined in this chapter, for a period of two years, and is a resident, having resided continuously in the state for a period of two years, and "(3) The state or country issuing the original certificate grants similar privileges to persons holding certificates as certified public accountants issued under the laws of this state, and,

"(4) The board is otherwise fully satisfied as to the moral and technical fitness of the applicant."

The Board denied seven applications on the following grounds, viz.:

1. As to each of the seven applicants upon the ground that they were not residents of the State of Florida.

2. As to six of the several applicants, upon the additional ground that the states wherein they were originally certified did not grant "similar privileges" to Florida C.P.As. as required by Section 473.19(3).

Petitioners by the instant petition for writ of certiorari assert that the Board unlawfully denied the applications in that:

(1) The denial on the ground of nonresidency is contrary to law, is in direct conflict with the decisions of the Supreme Court, and is in violation of petitioners' rights under the constitutions of Florida and of the United States.

(2) The denial of the applications on the ground of lack of similar privileges of reciprocity to Florida accountants is contrary to fact and law, is in conflict with the decision of the Supreme Court and is in violation of petitioners' rights under the constitutions of Florida and of the United States.

We will first dispose of petitioners' contentions that the action of the Board is "* * * in violation of petitioners' rights under the Florida and United States Constitution." A concise definition of reciprocity is set out in Volume 36, Words and Phrases, Permanent Edition, p. 770, viz.: "`Reciprocity' denotes mutuality, or the relationship existing between states when each gives citizens of other certain favors or privileges that its own citizens enjoy at hands of other state; and applicant for certificate of registration as professional engineer has no vested right to have board issue him certificate merely because he held certificate of registration granted him by proper authorities in another jurisdiction." Also see Spindel v. Jamison (1958), 199 Va. 954, 103 S.E.2d 205, 208. Thus, it is apparent that the reciprocal certificates as outlined in the quoted statute are "privileges", as distinguished from "rights", which privileges...