Venture Corp. of Sarasota v. Department of Business Regulation

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Venture Corp. of Sarasota v. Department of Business Regulation

557 So. 2d 686, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1343, 1990 WL 20385

District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided March 8, 1990·No. No. 89-245·Published

Opinion

DANIEL, Chief Judge.

This is an administrative appeal of an order entered by the Department of Business Regulation against Venture Corporation of Sarasota, Inc., Donald Kun, Sr. and Donald Kun, Jr. for violations of the Flor-lda Condominium Act and the Florida Uniform Land Sales Practices Act. As this court has previously noted, the scope of review of an administrative action is narrow and an appellate court is bound to affirm administrative determinations or findings unless there is no competent substantial evidence to support them. Clark v. Department of Professional Regulation, 463 So.2d 328 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). See also § 120.68(10), Fla.Stat. (1989). After a careful review of the record, we conclude that there is no competent substantial evidence to support liability on the part of Donald Kun, Jr. Accordingly, we reverse the order in so far as it imposes sanctions against him.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

W. SHARP and COWART, JJ., concur.

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

DANIEL, Chief Judge.

This is an administrative appeal of an order entered by the Department of Business Regulation against Venture Corporation of Sarasota, Inc., Donald Kun, Sr. and Donald Kun, Jr. for violations of the Flor-lda Condominium Act and the Florida Uniform Land Sales Practices Act. As this court has previously noted, the scope of review of an administrative action is narrow and an appellate court is bound to affirm administrative determinations or findings unless there is no competent substantial evidence to support them. Clark v. Department of Professional Regulation, 463 So.2d 328 (Fla. 5th DCA 1985). See also § 120.68(10), Fla.Stat. (1989). After a careful review of the record, we conclude that there is no competent substantial evidence to support liability on the part of Donald Kun, Jr. Accordingly, we reverse the order in so far as it imposes sanctions against him.

REVERSED and REMANDED.

W. SHARP and COWART, JJ., concur.

Venture Corp. of Sarasota v. Department of Business Regulation, 557 So. 2d 686, 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1343, 1990 WL 20385 (Fla. Ct. App. 1990).

Pincite

557 So. 2d 686 (Venture Corp. of Sarasota v. Department of Business Regulation) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Opinion

Related