SOUTH FLORIDA CARGO CARRIERS ASSOCIATION, INC. AND FLORIDA CARIBBEAN CRUISE ASSOCIATION, PETITIONERS,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, BOARD OF PILOT COMMISSIONERS, RESPONDENT

Fla. 1st DCA | 1993-12-07
No. 93-3244
ZEHMER, C.J., and MICKLE and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur.
627 So. 2d 597 Florida District Court of Appeal, First District (1993)

AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.

Synopsis

Two nonprofit organizations representing cargo and passenger carriers petitioned the Florida Board of Pilot Commissioners for a rate change and sought immediate referral to the Division of Administrative Hearings for a formal proceeding. The court denied their petition for mandamus or prohibition, holding that the Board properly followed administrative procedure by conducting informal proceedings before determining its intended action.


Holding

The Board properly followed the Administrative Procedure Act by conducting informal 'free form' proceedings under Chapter 21SS before determining its intended action. Only after the Board issues a notice of intended agency action should petitioners be permitted to request referral to DOAH for a formal hearing. The petitioners were premature in seeking such referral.


Headnotes

[1] An agency is not required to refer a petition for a rate change to the Division of Administrative Hearings when the petition is subject to "free form" proceedings until t…

[2] A party seeking a change in pilotage rates must await the agency's notice of intended agency action before requesting referral to the Division of Administrative Hearings…

Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Key Quotes

“Petitioners misconstrue the nature of the chapter 120 proceedings. Petitioners have styled their pleading in the lower tribunal as seeking a formal administrative hearing and a change in the rates of pilotage. However, in reality it is merely an application for relief from the board which is subject to 'free form' proceedings until the agency determines its intended action.”

Establishes that petitioners' initial request for rate change constitutes an informal application, not yet a formal proceeding under Chapter 120

Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

South Florida Cargo Carriers Association and Florida Caribbean Cruise Association filed petitions with the Board of Pilot Commissioners seeking change…

The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.


Opinion of the Court
PER CURIAM.

PER CURIAM.

South Florida Cargo Carriers Association, Inc. and Florida Caribbean Cruise Association, Inc., petition this court for a writ of mandamus or prohibition. Because the respondent Board of Pilot Commissioners is proceeding correctly in accordance with the Administrative Procedure Act, Chapter 120, Florida Statutes, we deny the petition.

The two petitioners in this cause are nonprofit organizations which act on behalf of cargo and passenger carriers which operate in the navigable waters of Florida. They show that they filed petitions with the respondent board for a change in the rates of pilotage in the ports of Miami and Port Everglades. The petitioners alleged that the current rates are arbitrary and capricious and based on financial reports that were not sound. These pleadings before the board are styled as petitions for formal administrative hearing and petitioners have requested that the board refer them immediately to the Division of Administrative Hearings (DOAH).

The board has declined this request, taking the position that chapter 21SS, Florida Administrative Code, provides for certain procedures which must be performed and complied with at this point in the process. The petitioners now come to this court seeking prohibition or mandamus, arguing that the board is without authority to so act and that it has a ministerial duty to immediately refer this matter to DOAH. It is shown that section 120.57(l)(a)l., Florida Statutes, provides that a DOAH hearing officer shall conduct all hearings for formal proceedings except for hearings before agency heads or a member thereof other than an agency head or a member of an agency head with the Department of Professional Regulation.1 This statute clearly shows legislative intent that the board, an agency within the department, may not conduct a formal hearing in this cause. Petitioners argue that there clearly are issues of material fact in dispute.

Accordingly, the matter must be referred to' DOAH within 15 days under section 120.-57(l)(b)3. Amended petitions were filed in August of this year and the board continues to adhere to its position that the matter cannot be now referred to DOAH. Petitioners argue there is nothing in chapter 310, Florida Statutes, which allows the board to interpose this investigative committee process as a condition precedent to the entitlement to a section 120.57(1) formal administrative hearing and the board cannot recklessly interpret its own rules to accomplish this end, citing State, Department of Insurance v. Insurance Services Office, 434 So. 2d 908 (Fla. 1st DCA 1983).

Petitioners ask this court to prohibit the board from further exercising jurisdiction and/or to mandate that the petitions for rate change be referred promptly to DOAH.

Petitioners misconstrue the nature of the chapter 120 proceedings. Petitioners have styled their pleading in the lower tribunal as seeking a formal administrative hearing and a change in the rates of pilotage.

However, in reality it is merely an application for relief from the board which is subject to “free form” proceedings until the agency determines its intended action. Capeletti Brothers v. State, Department of Transportation, 362 So. 2d 346, 348 (Fla. 1st DCA 1978), cert. denied, 368 So. 2d 1374 (Fla.1979).

The proceedings before the board are governed by chapter 21SS of the Florida Administrative Code, as the agency contends. Once the agency determines how it will respond to the request for rate change it must provide the petitioners with a notice of intended agency action and a clear point of entry into the administrative process. Capeletti Brothers, 362 So. 2d at 348. If the board’s responses to the rate change petitions are negative, this would be the proper time for the petitioners to request referral to DOAH.

We find nothing in chapter 310, Florida Statutes, and administrative code chapter 21SS that suggests the ordinary chapter 120 procedure should be different in this particular proceeding. Petitioners are premature in anticipating that the board will deny their request and that there will be disputed issues of material fact.

PETITION DENIED.

ZEHMER, C.J., and MICKLE and LAWRENCE, JJ., concur. . Now the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, see Ch. 93-220, Laws of Florida.


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw