Natelson v. Department of Ins., AU-384
Decision Date | 27 July 1984 |
Docket Number | No. AU-384,AU-384 |
Citation | 454 So.2d 31 |
Parties | Gerald B. NATELSON, Appellant, v. DEPARTMENT OF INSURANCE, Appellee. |
Court | Florida District Court of Appeals |
Richard A. Barnett, P.A., Hollywood, for appellant.
Curtis Billingsley, Dept. of Ins., Tallahassee, for appellee.
Appellant, Gerald Natelson, challenges the final order of Florida Department of Insurance (the department), revoking his licenses as insurance agent in opposition to the recommended order of Department of Administrative Hearings (DOAH) hearing officer. We find his argument to be without merit and AFFIRM the ruling below.
Natelson, a licensed insurance agent, was indicted in federal court for his involvement in an unconsummated conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute methaqualone, hashish, and cannabis in violation of 21 U.S.C. §§ 841(a)(1) and 846. The indictment was based on his overt acts of attending three meetings with co-conspirators. Although he admittedly knew that the planned activity was illegal, Natelson maintained that his role was merely one of introducing the conspirators and that he did not expect to profit from the conspiracy. Natelson pled guilty to the charge as it related to cannabis only and was sentenced to a term of thirty months in a federal penitentiary.
After release from prison, Natelson was charged by administrative complaint with (1) demonstrating lack of fitness or untrustworthiness to engage in the business of insurance, Section 626.611(7), Florida Statutes; (2) having pled guilty, in this or any state, to a felony involving moral turpitude, Section 626.611(14), Florida Statutes, and (3) having pled guilty, in this or any state, to a felony, Section 626.621(8), Florida Statutes. Natelson protested the complaint and a hearing was held, resulting in an order of the DOAH hearing officer recommending dismissal of all counts of the complaint. In its final order, the department adopted the recommended order's findings of fact, as modified by the department's findings, rejected the hearing officer's conclusions of law and revoked Natelson's licenses.
Natelson contends on appeal that his plea of guilty to conspiracy to distribute and possess with intent to distribute cannabis was an insufficient basis for the department's finding that he has demonstrated a lack of fitness or trustworthiness to engage in the business of insurance and that his license, therefore, is not subject to the mandatory revocation sanctions of Section 626.611(7). We cannot agree.
Agencies are afforded wide discretion in the interpretation of a statute which it...
To continue reading
Request your trial-
U.S. v. Technic Services, Inc.
...Funeral Service, 289 Mont. 407, 961 P.2d 126 (1998) (holder of mortician's license has position of public trust); Natelson v. Dep't of Ins., 454 So.2d 31 (Fla.App. 1 Dist.1984) (insurance license); see also 51 Am.Jur.2d § 17 (licenses protect the public health, safety and welfare where lice......
-
Bayonet Point Regional Medical Center v. Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services
...the reviewing court should defer to any interpretation that is within the range of possible interpretations. Natelson v. Department of Insurance, 454 So.2d 31 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984), review denied, 461 So.2d 115 (Fla.1985); Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Wright, 439 So.2d ......
-
Florida Waterworks Ass'n v. Florida Public Service Com'n
...Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services v. Framat Realty, Inc., 407 So.2d 238 (Fla. 1st DCA 1981). Natelson v. Department of Insurance, 454 So.2d 31, 32 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). II. We next determine if there is record support for the hearing officer's finding that the two terms in que......
-
Beckett v. Department of Financial Services
...to her customers should enter into an evaluation of whether the agent has carried out those duties. See Natelson v. Dep't of Ins., 454 So.2d 31, 32 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). The fiduciary responsibility an insurance agent has to her customers explains why the agent cannot merely give forms to a ......