Hialeah Racing Ass'n v. Department of Business & Professional Regulation, Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Hialeah Racing Ass'n v. Department of Business & Professional Regulation, Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering

907 So. 2d 1235, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 10788, 2005 WL 1631116

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided July 13, 2005·No. No. 3D04-3001·Published

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Hialeah Racing Association, LLC (“Hialeah Racing”), appeals a final order of the [1236]*1236Department of Business and Professional Regulation revoking Hialeah Racing’s pari-mutuel wagering thoroughbred racing permit and denying its 2003-2004 annual thoroughbred racing license application. Finding no merit to Hialeah Racing’s arguments on appeal, we affirm.

The record demonstrates that the Department’s order is supported by competent, substantial evidence. § 120.68(7)(b), Fla. Stat. (2004); Pou v. Dept. of Ins., 707 So.2d 941 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); Pershing Indus., Inc. v. Dep’t of Banking & Fin., 591 So.2d 991 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). Additionally, this court will not overturn an agency’s construction of a statute it has been entrusted to administer where its interpretation is not clearly erroneous. Pan Am. World Airways, Inc. v. Fla. Pub. Serv. Comm., 427 So.2d 716 (Fla.1983); Pershing Indus., Inc. The record supports the agency’s finding that Hialeah’s voluntary decision not to run its scheduled races was based purely on an economic concern, which is not a statutory exception.¹ Section 550.01215(4), Florida Statutes (2002), clearly specifies that “[f]i-nancial hardship to the permitholder shall not, in and of itself, constitute just cause for failure to operate all performances on the date and at the times specified.” The financial hardship causing Hialeah Racing’s inability to field enough horses to compete against other racetracks does not constitute just cause under the statute. Moreover, as Hialeah’s remaining point on appeal lacks merit, there is no basis for disturbing the final order.

Affirmed.

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

PER CURIAM.

Hialeah Racing Association, LLC (“Hialeah Racing”), appeals a final order of the [1236]*1236Department of Business and Professional Regulation revoking Hialeah Racing’s pari-mutuel wagering thoroughbred racing permit and denying its 2003-2004 annual thoroughbred racing license application. Finding no merit to Hialeah Racing’s arguments on appeal, we affirm.

The record demonstrates that the Department’s order is supported by competent, substantial evidence. § 120.68(7)(b), Fla. Stat. (2004); Pou v. Dept. of Ins., 707 So.2d 941 (Fla. 3d DCA 1998); Pershing Indus., Inc. v. Dep’t of Banking & Fin., 591 So.2d 991 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991). Additionally, this court will not overturn an agency’s construction of a statute it has been entrusted to administer where its interpretation is not clearly erroneous. Pan Am. World Airways, Inc. v. Fla. Pub. Serv. Comm., 427 So.2d 716 (Fla.1983); Pershing Indus., Inc. The record supports the agency’s finding that Hialeah’s voluntary decision not to run its scheduled races was based purely on an economic concern, which is not a statutory exception.¹ Section 550.01215(4), Florida Statutes (2002), clearly specifies that “[f]i-nancial hardship to the permitholder shall not, in and of itself, constitute just cause for failure to operate all performances on the date and at the times specified.” The financial hardship causing Hialeah Racing’s inability to field enough horses to compete against other racetracks does not constitute just cause under the statute. Moreover, as Hialeah’s remaining point on appeal lacks merit, there is no basis for disturbing the final order.

Affirmed.

Hialeah Racing Ass'n v. Department of Business & Professional Regulation, Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering, 907 So. 2d 1235, 2005 Fla. App. LEXIS 10788, 2005 WL 1631116 (Fla. Ct. App. 2005).

Pincite

907 So. 2d 1235 (Hialeah Racing Ass'n v. Department of Business & Professional Regulation, Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related