Calfin v. State, Department of Business Regulation, Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Calfin v. State, Department of Business Regulation, Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering

407 So. 2d 1090, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 18917

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 5, 1982

DocketNo. 81-372

StatusPublished

This text of 407 So. 2d 1090 (Calfin v. State, Department of Business Regulation, Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Calfin v. State, Department of Business Regulation, Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering, 407 So. 2d 1090, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 18917 (Fla. Ct. App. 1982).

Pincite

Opinion

BASKIN, Judge.

We affirm the Division’s denial of appellant’s application for a horse trainer’s license upon our conclusion that its denial is in accord with the decision of the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Calfin v. State, Department of Business Regulation, 391 So.2d 739 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). On rehearing, the court modified the penalty imposed to revocation of her license and a $400 fine; it held that the “additional penalty” imposed by the Division was unauthorized and could not remain in effect. The additional penalty was contained in an amended order of the Division. It denied appellant privileges of the grounds for the two-year period she had been made ineligible for licensing in the Division’s original order. The appellate court did not, however, alter the provision which declared appellant ineligible for licensing for two years until December 12, 1981.

Affirmed.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

BASKIN, Judge.

We affirm the Division’s denial of appellant’s application for a horse trainer’s license upon our conclusion that its denial is in accord with the decision of the Fourth District Court of Appeal in Calfin v. State, Department of Business Regulation, 391 So.2d 739 (Fla. 4th DCA 1980). On rehearing, the court modified the penalty imposed to revocation of her license and a $400 fine; it held that the “additional penalty” imposed by the Division was unauthorized and could not remain in effect. The additional penalty was contained in an amended order of the Division. It denied appellant privileges of the grounds for the two-year period she had been made ineligible for licensing in the Division’s original order. The appellate court did not, however, alter the provision which declared appellant ineligible for licensing for two years until December 12, 1981.

Affirmed.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

407 So. 2d 1090, 1982 Fla. App. LEXIS 18917, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/calfin-v-state-department-of-business-regulation-division-of-pari-mutuel-fladistctapp-1982.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack