Hunter v. Department of Professional Regulation
| Citation | 458 So.2d 842 |
| Decision Date | 07 November 1984 |
| Docket Number | No. 84-376,84-376 |
| Parties | Sarah HUNTER, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, Appellee. |
| Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Thomas M. Brondstetter and Curtright C. Truitt of Burnett, Brondstetter & Tew, P.A., Fort Myers, for appellant.
Douglas A. Shropshire, Tallahassee, for appellee.
Sarah Hunter, a certified residential contractor and the qualifying agent of Hunter Homes, Inc., appeals from a final administrative order of the Department of Professional Regulation, Construction Industry Licensing Board, finding that she diverted funds from and abandoned two construction projects. The Board ordered her to pay a fine of $200.00 and suspended her license for at least one year or until she made restitution of the diverted funds. We reverse.
In April 1979, Hunter Homes, Inc. contracted to build a home for Ludon and Donna Williams. The escrow agent paid Hunter Homes $31,040.00 of $31,550.00 put in escrow by the Williams before Hunter Homes went out of business in August 1979. The Williams' home was not completed. The driveway was only partially finished and the home lacked window sills, toilets, lavatories, a sliding glass door, garage door, stove, dishwasher, carpeting and sod.
Also in April 1979, Hunter Homes contracted to build a home for Marsha Montgomery. In early August, Montgomery made a down payment of $1,600.00. Construction of the home had not begun when Hunter Homes went out of business several weeks later. Because Montgomery's contract did not require the down payment to be placed in escrow, it was subject to the claims of the corporation's general creditors and was not recovered by Montgomery.
The administrative complaint charged Sarah Hunter with diverting funds from both projects and abandoning the Williams project. The complaint sought to revoke or suspend her license as a certified residential contractor. After an administrative hearing, the hearing officer found as facts that Sarah Hunter's husband, Robert, handled the financial affairs of the corporation; that Hunter Homes lost money because of the delay between contracting to sell homes and building them and the resultant inflationary increases in construction costs; that Robert concealed from Sarah the corporation's financial status; and that once Sarah became aware of the financial situation she did all she could to protect corporate creditors. The hearing officer found that Hunter Homes' problem was primarily one of cash flow. The hearing officer concluded that pursuant to section 489.129(1)(h), Florida Statutes (1979), 1 there was no evidence of diversion of funds from either project. He also concluded that Hunter abandoned the Williams project because the corporation went out of business and section 489.129(1)(k), Florida Statutes (1979), 2 does not purport to punish inept business conduct. The hearing officer recommended that the charges against Hunter be dismissed.
The Construction Industry Licensing Board adopted the hearing officer's findings of fact but concluded that Hunter abandoned and diverted funds from both projects in violation of sections 489.129(1)(h) and (k). In addition to fining Hunter and suspending her license, the Board ordered her to make restitution in the amounts of $6,870.00 to the Williams and $2,000.00 to Montgomery.
Initially, we note that although Hunter was charged with abandoning only the Williams project, the Board found her guilty of abandoning both projects. Although a complaint filed by an administrative agency is not required to fulfill the technical niceties of a legal pleading, it must be specific...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Sunshine Jr. Stores, Inc. v. State, Dept. of Environmental Regulation
...v. Long, 422 So.2d 938, 940 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982), review denied, 431 So.2d 989 (Fla.1983). See also Hunter v. Department of Professional Reg., 458 So.2d 842, 844 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). I therefore see no basis on which reversal can be predicated due to a theory of inadequate notice. Moreover, a......
-
Harloff v. City of Sarasota
...those of the hearing officer, so long as competent substantial evidence supported the substituted legal conclusions. Hunter v. Dep't of Prof. Reg., 458 So.2d 842 (Fla.1984); MacPherson v. School Bd. of Monroe County, 505 So.2d 682 (Fla. 3d DCA The District's final order will undoubtedly for......
-
Lewis v. Criminal Justice Standards and Training Com'n, AW-189
...it must be specific enough to inform the accused with reasonable certainty of the nature of the charges." Hunter v. Dept. of Professional Regulation, 458 So.2d 842 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). In this case, the Commission's administrative complaint did not allege any conduct on the part of appellant......
-
Maddox v. Department of Professional Regulation, 90-3842
...of the nature of the charges, but it need not fulfill the technical niceties of a legal pleading. Hunter v. Department of Professional Regulation, 458 So.2d 842 (Fla. 2d DCA 1984). The complaint makes clear the nature of the alleged violations and the statutory provisions allegedly violated......