Hunt v. Department of Professional Regulation, Const. Industry Licensing Bd., s. AR-473

• Decision Date: 30 December 1983
• Docket Number: AR-474,Nos. AR-473,s. AR-473
• Parties: Bill H. HUNT, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD, Appellees. Herbert S. McNAIRY, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD, Appellees.
• Court: Florida District Court of Appeals

Page 997

444 So.2d 997

Bill H. HUNT, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD, Appellees.

Herbert S. McNAIRY, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD, Appellees.

Nos. AR-473, AR-474.

District Court of Appeal of Florida,

First District.

Dec. 30, 1983.

Rehearing Denied Feb. 24, 1984.

J. Michael Huey and Lawrence W. Smith, Tallahassee, for appellants.

Charles F. Tunnicliff and Stephanie A. Daniel, Dept. of Professional Regulation, Tallahassee, for appellees.

PEARSON, TILLMAN, Retired, Associate Judge.

These appeals were argued separately in this Court but they arise out of the same record and the separate final orders were based upon the same hearing and recommended order. In order to save unnecessary repetition they are dealt with here separately but in one opinion.

THE APPEAL OF BILL H. HUNT

Bill H. Hunt was a licensed general contractor. His license was revoked by the Construction Industry Licensing Board of the Department of Professional Regulation. This appeal is from that order.

The complaint arose out of the following circumstances. Hunt was one of several "qualifiers," i.e., one holding a general construction license who because of his participation in the business enables a corporation to act as a general contractor, § 468.107(2), Florida Statutes (Supp.1978), working for Hunt Brothers Construction, Inc. George Hunt Inc., the parent corporation of Hunt Brothers, entered into a contract with Don Olson Firestone, Inc., for the construction of a warehouse building in Clearwater, Florida. Hunt, acting for the corporate contractor, applied for and received from the Pinellas County Building Department a building permit for construction on the warehouse. The permit was signed by Hunt.

The work on the warehouse progressed until a subcontractor was applying a gypsum deck on the top of the roofing structure on the north end of the building. The structure on that end collapsed, killing one workman and injuring several others. Inspection of the scene following the collapse and subsequent investigation revealed numerous deviations from the plans and specifications. There were no plans or shop drawings maintained at the job site. Further, there was a conspicious lack of supervision of the construction of the warehouse by any qualifying general contractor.

The Hearing Officer concluded that Bill Hunt, together with Herbert McNairy, who was another "qualifier" for Hunt Brothers, were responsible for the project. The Hearing Officer recommended that their licenses as general contractors be revoked because of their willful or deliberate disregard and violation of local building codes. § 468.112(2)(a), Florida Statutes (Supp.1978). The Licensing Board adopted this finding and recommendation and in addition sustained an exception to the Hearing Officer's conclusion of law that a contractor qualifying a corporation is not responsible for the supervision of construction undertaken by the corporation. The Board found that Hunt was responsible for the supervision of the construction. The final order revoked appellant Hunt's license as a general contractor for having (1) violated § 468.112(2)(a), Florida Statutes (Supp.1978), by willfully and deliberately disregarding and violating the local building code; and (2) violated § 468.112(2)(g), Florida Statutes (Supp.1978), by failing to supervise construction.

The first point presented upon this appeal urges that Hunt may not be disciplined because he was only one of several qualifiers for the corporation. While the Board did hold that all the qualifiers of a corporation could be held for violations of a building permit and applicable state statutes, that holding is not determinative on I certify, together with plans and specifications, this application shows a true representation of construction to be accomplished under this permit. It is understood that any deviations from the original documents will render this permit issued under this application null and void, unless approved by the Building Director ... I agree to conform to all Building Department Regulations and Pinellas County Ordinances regulating Building and Zoning ordinances.

this appeal. The pertinent question is whether Hunt's involvement in this construction process was such as to raise a duty to supervise construction and not to willfully or deliberately disregard and violate local building codes. We hold that Hunt's involvement was direct and intimate because it was upon his certification that the permit was issued and the plans approved. At the bottom of the permit application and directly above Hunt's signature thereon it states:

Hunt later signed a supplemental permit application for the same construction.

Alles v. Department of Professional Regulation, 423 So.2d 624 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982), is governing on this appeal. In that case Alles was the sole qualifying contractor for his company. His defense to the complaint to revoke his license was that he had no involvement with the project. The Court reasoned:

The obvious purpose of these statutes allowing a company to act as a contractor through a licensed contractor is to insure that projects undertaken...