Deel Motors, Inc. v. Department of Commerce, P-31
Court | Court of Appeal of Florida (US) |
Writing for the Court | WIGGINTON; SPECTOR, C. J., and JOHNSON |
Citation | 252 So.2d 389 |
Parties | DEEL MOTORS, INC., et al., Petitioners, v. DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE of the State of Florida, and Edward L. Mead, et al., as Trustees of the Automotive Industries of Florida Self Insurers Fund, et al., Respondents. |
Docket Number | No. P-31,P-31 |
Decision Date | 21 September 1971 |
Page 389
v.
DEPARTMENT OF COMMERCE of the State of Florida, and Edward L. Mead, et al., as Trustees of the Automotive Industries of Florida Self Insurers Fund, et al., Respondents.
Page 391
Truett & Watkins, Tallahassee, for petitioners.
F. Perry Odom and N. Sanders Sauls, of Ervin, Pennington, Varn & Jacobs, Tallahassee, for respondents.
WIGGINTON, Judge.
Petitioners seek review by certiorari of a final order rendered by respondent, Department of Commerce of the State of Florida, Division of Labor and Employment Opportunities, which assesses against petitioners and other employer members of the Automotive Industries of Florida Self Insurers Fund certain specified sums of money representing their pro rata liability for earned premiums due for workmen's compensation insurance coverage afforded them by the Fund for the years 1963 to 1966, inclusive. It is contended that the order complained of is void and of no legal effect because (1) the proceedings conducted by respondent Department of Commerce, which form the predicate for the order, were conducted in a manner contrary to the requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act, F.S. chapter 120, F.S.A., thereby depriving petitioners of due process and equal protection of the laws as guaranteed by the state and federal constitutions; and (2) it is predicated solely and exclusively upon the purported authority granted by Chapter 69--106, Laws of Florida, 1969 (F.S. § 440.58, F.S.A.), which statute petitioners contend is unconstitutional, void, and of no legal support for the order here assaulted.
At all times material to this cause petitioners were engaged in various branches of the automotive industry in Florida. Prior to the year 1963 petitioners, together with other employers similarly engaged, created and became members of the Automotive Industries of Florida Self Insurers Fund. The purpose of this organization was to enable the employer members to pool their liabilities and qualify as self-insurers in accordance with the provisions of the workmen's compensation law of this state. 1 The agreement so entered into by petitioners was duly approved by the then Florida Industrial Commission which was charged with the duty of administering the workmen's compensation act of Florida. 2 The Automotive Industries of Florida Self Insurers Fund was administered by a board of trustees elected by the membership, whose duty it was to supervise the collection from the employer members of periodic payments in such amounts as were required to provide workmen's compensation coverage for their respective employees. The trustees of the Fund entered into an agreement with Robert F. Coleman of Florida, Inc., as its agent to service the claims of the members of the Fund arising under the workmen's compensation law of Florida. Robert F. Coleman of Florida, Inc., after having been approved as servicing agent by the Florida Industrial Commission, became insolvent, as a result of which the Fund was unable to pay the claims against it filed by employees of the Fund members for benefits accruing to them during the years 1963, 1964, 1965, and 1966 under the workmen's compensation law of this state.
In order to provide an effective procedure for servicing and paying the claims of employees against the employer members of the Fund, the Legislature of Florida enacted Chapter 67--606, Laws of Florida,
Page 392
1967. This statute directs the Florida Industrial Commission, upon the receipt of a petition by the trustees of the Fund involved in this proceeding, to enter its order requiring the employer members of the Fund liable therefor to pay all delinquent premiums and all assessments which may be necessary for the payment of workmen's compensation claims and related expenses owing to the employees of the members. 3 The trustees of the Fund, in the discharge of what they conceived to be their proper function and duty, proceeded to compute the amount of assessments which would be required to be paid by each member of the Fund in order to permit the discharge of the Fund's outstanding obligations to the employees of its members for workmen's compensation benefits which accrued during the four-year period hereinabove stated. Each member of the Fund was notified of the amount of assessment levied against it, but when the payment of such assessments was not forthcoming within what the trustees felt to be a reasonable time, the trustees filed with the Department of Commerce their petition setting forth the assessments levied against all delinquent members of the Fund and the method by which the assessments were computed by them. By this petition the trustees prayed for an order requiring the employer members of the Fund to pay to the Department the assessments...To continue reading
Request your trial-
University Community Hosp. v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services, s. 91-3270
...of due process." Conklin Center v. Williams, 519 So.2d 38, 39 (Fla. 5th DCA 1988). See also Deel Motors, Inc. v. Department of Commerce, 252 So.2d 389 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971). The rules of pleading are not applied in administrative proceedings as strictly as they are in court proceedings, It is......
-
Robinson v. State, Case No. 2D17-3087
...for Responsible Gov't, Inc. v. Fla. Keys Aqueduct Auth., 795 So. 2d 940, 948 (Fla. 2001) )); Deel Motors, Inc. v. Dep't of Commerce, 252 So. 2d 389, 394 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971) ("[A]ll proceedings conducted by any state agency, board, commission, or department for the purpose of adjudicating an......
-
Board of Trustees of Billings School Dist. No. 2 of Yellowstone County v. State ex rel. Bd. of Personnel Appeals, 14653
...v. Johnson (6th Cir. 1963), 322 F.2d 216, 220. See also, Glenn, supra; Deel Motors, Inc. v. Department of Commerce (Fla.App.1971), 252 So.2d 389. We hold that the District received fair notice that the charge of coercion would be litigated. The complaint charged coercion when it stated that......
-
H. Miller & Sons, Inc. v. Hawkins, 52058
...the Commission relied . . . ." Occidental Chemical Co. v. Mayo, 351 So.2d 336, 341 (Fla.1977); Deel Motors, Inc. v. Dept. of Commerce, 252 So.2d 389 (Fla. 1st DCA 1971). The Commission directly addressed this issue in Order 7851. We agree with the following excerpt from that We believe the ......