Titzel v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Professional Engineers

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Titzel v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Professional Engineers

599 So. 2d 279, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 6201, 1992 WL 114641

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJune 2, 1992

DocketNo. 92-74

StatusPublished

Cited by2 cases

This text of 599 So. 2d 279 (Titzel v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Professional Engineers) 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

Titzel v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Professional Engineers, 599 So. 2d 279, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 6201, 1992 WL 114641 (Fla. Ct. App. 1992).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

James L. Titzel appeals an order of the Board of Professional Engineers which revoked his professional license. A hearing officer of the Division of Administrative Hearings had recommended that the complaint be dismissed because the agency had not proved the allegations of the complaint at hearing. The agency rejected that recommendation in its final order but now concedes its error in doing so. Accordingly, we reverse and remand with directions to dismiss the administrative complaint with prejudice.

We also find that the agency action which precipitated the appeal was a gross abuse of discretion and grant appellant’s motion for attorney’s fees. Fla.Stat. § 120.57(l)(b)10. (1991). This matter is remanded to the hearing officer of the Division of Administrative Hearings to hold an evidentiary hearing, if the parties are unable to stipulate, and to make recommendations to this court as to the amount of attorney’s fees for the appellant at the hearing level and on appeal. A report shall be filed within forty-five (45) days of the date of this opinion and a separate order taxing attorney’s fees will then be entered by this court. See Purvis v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Veterinary Medicine, 461 So.2d 134, 137-38 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).

JOANOS, C.J., and ALLEN and WOLF, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

James L. Titzel appeals an order of the Board of Professional Engineers which revoked his professional license. A hearing officer of the Division of Administrative Hearings had recommended that the complaint be dismissed because the agency had not proved the allegations of the complaint at hearing. The agency rejected that recommendation in its final order but now concedes its error in doing so. Accordingly, we reverse and remand with directions to dismiss the administrative complaint with prejudice.

We also find that the agency action which precipitated the appeal was a gross abuse of discretion and grant appellant’s motion for attorney’s fees. Fla.Stat. § 120.57(l)(b)10. (1991). This matter is remanded to the hearing officer of the Division of Administrative Hearings to hold an evidentiary hearing, if the parties are unable to stipulate, and to make recommendations to this court as to the amount of attorney’s fees for the appellant at the hearing level and on appeal. A report shall be filed within forty-five (45) days of the date of this opinion and a separate order taxing attorney’s fees will then be entered by this court. See Purvis v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Veterinary Medicine, 461 So.2d 134, 137-38 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984).

JOANOS, C.J., and ALLEN and WOLF, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

599 So. 2d 279, 1992 Fla. App. LEXIS 6201, 1992 WL 114641, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/titzel-v-department-of-professional-regulation-board-of-professional-fladistctapp-1992.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack