Star Employment Service, Inc. v. Florida Indus. Commission
| Court | United States State Supreme Court of Florida |
| Writing for the Court | THORNAL; THOMAS |
| Citation | 122 So.2d 174 |
| Parties | STAR EMPLOYMENT SERVICE, INC., Petitioner, v. FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION, Respondent. |
| Decision Date | 15 June 1960 |
Page 174
v.
FLORIDA INDUSTRIAL COMMISSION, Respondent.
Page 175
Carl R. Pennington, Jr., of Ervin, Buford & Pennington, Tallahassee, Hall & Hedrick, Miami, W. P. Shelley, Jr., Tallahassee, Daisy Richard Bisz, Miami, for petitioner.
Burnis T. Coleman, Gen. Counsel and Lawrence Kanzer, Tallahassee, for respondent.
THORNAL, Justice.
The petitioner Star Employment Service, Inc., a private employment agency, requests us to review by certiorari an order of the Florida Industrial Commission which reversed an order of a deputy commissioner granting the petitioner's license.
We dispose of the matter on jurisdictional grounds without reaching the merits.
Petitioner Star Employment Service, Inc., operated a private employment agency under Chapter 449, Florida Statutes, F.S.A. Its license to do business was revoked pursuant to the procedure prescribed by Section 449.13, Florida Statutes, F.S.A. Upon the filing of the complaint the respondent Commission designated a deputy commissioner in Dade County, Florida, to hear the matter and enter an order as prescribed by law. The deputy ordered petitioner's license granted and this order was filed in the office of the respondent Commission at Tallahassee. Petitioner applied for review and upon such review the full commission reversed the deputy. Thereafter, petitioner filed its petition for a writ of certiorari in the District Court of Appeal, Third District, seeking review of the order of the respondent Commission. The District Court of Appeal sua sponte transferred the matter to this Court for consideration and determination. Petitioner has moved that we transfer the matter back to the District
Page 176
Court of Appeal. The respondent Commission appeared, filed its brief and requested oral argument in the District Court of Appeal.As has happened in several situations since the amendment of Article V, Florida Constitution, F.S.A., we are confronted by certain statutory provisions which have not yet been amended to harmonize with the amended judiciary article of the Constitution.
Section 449.13, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., contains a provision for the review which reads as follows:
'The order of the full commission shall be filed in the office of the commission and shall become final twenty days thereafter, unless either party shall file a notice of appeal to the circuit court in accordance with § 440.27, Florida Statutes. If remanded, the deputy commissioner shall proceed as the full commission may direct. Any party in interest may appeal the order of the full commission to the circuit court as a matter of right, following the same procedure, where not inconsistent with this chapter, as prescribed by § 440.27, Florida Statutes.'
Particular note should be taken of the provision which authorizes appeal 'to the circuit court in accordance with Section 440.27, Florida Statutes.' (Emphasis ours). Undoubtedly, this statutory provision contemplated the appellate procedure for reviewing workmen's compensation orders prior to the enactment of Chapter 28241, Laws of Florida, 1953, F.S.A. § 440.13 et seq. It will be recalled that formerly circuit courts reviewed workmen's compensation orders of the Florida Industrial Commission preliminary to ultimate review by this Court. Section 440.27, supra, has been changed. See Chapter 59-142, Laws of Florida, 1959. It now merely provides for direct review of workmen's compensation orders by petition for writ of certiorari to the Supreme Court. Obviously, the appeal provisions of Section 449.13, supra, the private employment agency statute, are now completely ineffective for the reason that they authorize an appeal to the 'circuit court' in accord with the provisions of a statute which makes no reference whatsoever to the 'circuit court.'
Article V, Section 26(10), Florida Constitution, provides that:
'Until otherwise provided by the legislature, orders of the Florida Industrial Commission shall be subject to review only by petition to the district courts of appeal for writ of...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Ringling Bros.-Barnum & Bailey Combined Shows, Inc. v. State, No. U--340
...47 So.2d 525; Henderson v. Gay, S.C.Fla.1950, 49 So.2d 325; Star Employment Service v. Florida Industrial Com'n., S.C.Fla.1960, 122 So.2d 174) The privilege of a defendant to be sued in a particular locality does not involve the question of jurisdiction. (Evans v. Evans, 141 Fla. 860, 194 S......
-
State, Dept. of Labor and Employment Sec. v. Lindquist, Nos. 97-01091
...where the suit is instituted. See Smith v. Williams, 160 Fla. 580, 35 So.2d 844 (1948); Star Employment Serv. v. Florida Indus. Comm'n, 122 So.2d 174 (Fla.1960). The purpose of this privilege is to promote orderly and uniform handling of state litigation and to prevent conflicting judicial ......
-
Miami-Dade Water & Sewer Authority v. Cormio, MIAMI-DADE
...logical in some way for that court, rather than a sister court, to act. Star Employment Service, Inc. v. Florida Indust. Comm'n, 122 So.2d 174 (Fla.1960). If the Constitution prohibited district court review of administrative action except in the district where that action "occurred", whenc......
-
Eckert v. Board of Com'rs of North Broward Hosp. Dist., No. 98-1485
...yet been amended to harmonize with the amended judiciary article of the Constitution." Star Employment Serv. v. Florida Indus. Comm'n, 122 So.2d 174, 175 Page 1156 Even though a portion of Chapter 27438, as amended, was repealed by virtue of the amendment to Article V, the remainder of the ......
-
Ringling Bros.-Barnum & Bailey Combined Shows, Inc. v. State, No. U--340
...47 So.2d 525; Henderson v. Gay, S.C.Fla.1950, 49 So.2d 325; Star Employment Service v. Florida Industrial Com'n., S.C.Fla.1960, 122 So.2d 174) The privilege of a defendant to be sued in a particular locality does not involve the question of jurisdiction. (Evans v. Evans, 141 Fla. 860, 194 S......
-
State, Dept. of Labor and Employment Sec. v. Lindquist, Nos. 97-01091
...where the suit is instituted. See Smith v. Williams, 160 Fla. 580, 35 So.2d 844 (1948); Star Employment Serv. v. Florida Indus. Comm'n, 122 So.2d 174 (Fla.1960). The purpose of this privilege is to promote orderly and uniform handling of state litigation and to prevent conflicting judicial ......
-
Miami-Dade Water & Sewer Authority v. Cormio, MIAMI-DADE
...logical in some way for that court, rather than a sister court, to act. Star Employment Service, Inc. v. Florida Indust. Comm'n, 122 So.2d 174 (Fla.1960). If the Constitution prohibited district court review of administrative action except in the district where that action "occurred", whenc......
-
Eckert v. Board of Com'rs of North Broward Hosp. Dist., No. 98-1485
...yet been amended to harmonize with the amended judiciary article of the Constitution." Star Employment Serv. v. Florida Indus. Comm'n, 122 So.2d 174, 175 Page 1156 Even though a portion of Chapter 27438, as amended, was repealed by virtue of the amendment to Article V, the remainder of the ......