AUSBON BROWN, JR., APPELLANT,
v.
AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION, APPELLEE
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.
Ausbon Brown appeals the Florida Commission on Human Relations' dismissal of his employment discrimination complaint against the Agency for Health Care Administration. The Commission found that AHCA had legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for not hiring Brown and selected more qualified candidates, with no evidence of pretext or discriminatory intent. The appellate court affirmed the dismissal.
The Commission's dismissal of Brown's discrimination complaint was affirmed because it was supported by competent, substantial evidence that AHCA had legitimate, nondiscriminatory reasons for not hiring Brown and selected more qualified candidates without discriminatory intent or pretext.
[1] An administrative agency's final order must be affirmed on appeal if supported by competent, substantial evidence in the record, absent a material procedural error, incor…
[2] An employer may articulate a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for not hiring an applicant, such as selecting a better-qualified candidate.
Previewing 2 of 4 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“the AHCA "did articulate a legitimate, nondiscriminatory reason for not hiring" Brown, and, in each instance that he was not hired, AHCA had "select[ed] someone who was better qualified, and that there was no evidence that [the AHCA's] actions were a pretext for discrimination, or that [the AHCA] acted with discriminatory intent."”
Establishes the findings of fact that supported dismissal of the discrimination complaint
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceBrown applied for several open positions at AHCA but was not hired for any of them. He filed a discrimination complaint alleging unlawful employment p…
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.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Unlawful Employment Practice cases and more on FLexlaw
ORFINGER, J.
Ausbon Brown, Jr. appeals from an amended final order of the Florida Commission on Human Relations (the “Commission”), which dismissed with prejudice his petition-for relief and Complaint for employment discrimination. This court has jurisdiction. See Fla. R.App. P. 9.030(b)(1)(C).
After not being hired for several open jobs at the Agency for Health Care Administration (“AHCA”), Brown filed a discrimination complaint with the Commission. In his complaint, Brown alleged that the AHCA committed an unlawful employment practice by discriminating against him based on his age, gender, and race. After an admittedly tortured administrative proceeding, the Commission ultimately accepted the administrative law judge’s findings that the AHCA “did articulate a legitimate , nondiscriminatory reason for not hiring” Brown, and, in each instance that he was not hired, AHCA had “select ed someone who was better qualified, and that there was no evidence that [the AHCA’s] actions were a pretext for discrimination, or that [the AHCA] acted'with discriminatory intent.” Accordingly, the Commission dismissed Brown’s petition for relief from unlawful employment discrimination with prejudice and this appeal followed.
Section 120.68, Florida Statutes (2003), governs appellate review of final administrative agency action. Generally, the inquiry on appeal is whether the final order is supported by competent, substantial evidence in the record.. § 120.68(7)(b), Fla. Stat. (2003); Dep’t of Banking & Fin., Div. of Sec. & Investor Protection v. Osborne Stem & Co., 670 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 1996). If supported by competent, substantial evidence, the order must be affirmed, absent a showing of a material error in procedure, an incorrect interpretation of law, or an abuse of discretion. §, 120.68.(7)(c)-(e), (8), Fla. Stat. (2003)..
We have carefully reviewed the entire record of these unduly, complicated proceedings. While it is clear that the Commission did not act as a model of efficiency in its disposition of Brown’s complaints, its ultimate resolution of the matter is supported by competent, substantial evidence. Accordingly, we affirm the Commission’s decision to dismiss Brown’s petition for relief and complaint with prejudice.
AFFIRMED.
GRIFFIN and THOMPSON, JJ., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Price v. Flagler Cnty. Schs., 21 So. 3d 166 (Fla. 5th DCA 2009)…e her petition for relief from an alleged unlawful employment practice. We affirm. A careful review of the record confirms that the hearing officer’s order was supported by competent, substantial evidence. See Brown v. Agency for Health Care Admin., 890 So. 2d 1170 (Fla. 5th DCA 2004). AFFIRMED. ORFINGER, LAWSON and EVANDER, JJ., concur.…
Authorities Cited
- Dep't of Banking & Fin. v. Osborne Stern & Co., 670 So. 2d 932 (Fla. 1996)