Phillip v. University of Florida

680 So. 2d 508, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 4060, 1996 WL 191608
CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida
DecidedApril 23, 1996
Docket95-3385
StatusPublished
Cited by3 cases

This text of 680 So. 2d 508 (Phillip v. University of Florida) 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
Phillip v. University of Florida, 680 So. 2d 508, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 4060, 1996 WL 191608 (Fla. Ct. App. 1996).

Opinion

680 So.2d 508 (1996)

Michael J. PHILLIP, Appellant,
v.
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA, Appellee.

No. 95-3385.

District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District.

April 23, 1996.

*509 Paul A. Donnelly of Franklin, Donnelly & Gross, Gainesville, for Appellant.

Barbara C. Wingo of University of Florida, Gainesville, for Appellee.

ALLEN, Judge.

The appellant challenges a final order of the University of Florida denying his petition for an administrative hearing pursuant to section 120.57, Florida Statutes, with regard to his termination from employment with the University. The University denied the petition as untimely and upon the further basis that the appellant had no substantial interests affected by his termination because he did not have tenure. But the appellant has alleged facts, supported by an affidavit, that would excuse the untimely filing of his petition. See Machules v. Department of Admin., 523 So.2d 1132 (Fla.1989). And he has alleged facts in his petition that would support a finding of tenure by estoppel. See Harris v. State, Dept. of Admin., 577 So.2d 1363, 1366 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); see also W.R. Grace & Co. v. Geodata Serv., 547 So.2d 919 (Fla.1989). He was therefore entitled to a hearing on whether his untimely filing should be excused. See Castillo v. Department of Admin., 593 So.2d 1116 (Fla. 2d DCA 1992). And if the untimely filing should have been excused, he was entitled to a further hearing on his petition.

Accordingly, the final order is set aside and the case is remanded.

ZEHMER, C.J., and DAVIS, J., concur.

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

Related

JANCYN MFG. v. State, Dept. of Health
742 So. 2d 473 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1999)
Unimed Laboratory, Inc. v. AHCA
715 So. 2d 1036 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1998)
Vantage Healthcare v. Health Care Admin.
687 So. 2d 306 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1997)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
680 So. 2d 508, 1996 Fla. App. LEXIS 4060, 1996 WL 191608, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/phillip-v-university-of-florida-fladistctapp-1996.