STEVEN PARMLEY
v.
FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES
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.
A hearing officer must be disqualified when she disputes a party's factual allegations in denying a disqualification motion, thereby creating an appearance of partiality before the hearing on disputed issues of material fact.
[1] A hearing officer in an administrative proceeding must be disqualified when she disputes a party's factual allegations in denying a disqualification motion, as doing so p…
Previewing 1 of 1 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“an 'impartial decision-maker is a basic constituent of minimum due process.'”
Court explaining that the administrative context does not eliminate the requirement for an impartial decision-maker.
Steven Parmley appealed the Department of Children and Families' denial of his request for food assistance program benefits. A hearing officer appoint…
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 Impartial Decision Maker cases and more on FLexlaw
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING
MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL
OF FLORIDA
SECOND DISTRICT
STEVEN PARMLEY, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D17-994 ) DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN ) AND FAMILIES, ) ) Appellee. ) )
Opinion filed August 22, 2018.
Appeal from the Department of Children and Families.
Steven Parmley, pro se.
Alicia Victoria Gonzalez, Tampa, for Appellee.
ROTHSTEIN-YOUAKIM, Judge.
After an evidentiary hearing, a hearing officer appointed by the
Department of Children and Families (DCF) Office of Appeal Hearings denied Steven
Parmley's administrative appeal of DCF's purported failure to act on his request for food assistance program benefits. See §§ 120.80(7), 409.285(1), Fla. Stat. (2017); Fla. Admin. Code. R. 65-2.042-.069. Parmley now appeals DCF's final administrative decision. Specifically, he challenges the hearing officer's written, nonfinal order—which she had entered before the evidentiary hearing—denying his motion to disqualify her from further participation in the proceeding.
Upon de novo review, see Dep't of Agric. & Consumer Servs. v. Broward
County, 810 So. 2d 1056, 1058 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002); see also Fla. R. App. P. 9.110(h),
9.190(a), we agree with Parmley's argument that the hearing officer erred by not merely evaluating the legal sufficiency of the motion but by also disputing his factual allegations in her written order, thereby placing herself in an adversarial position with him before the hearing at which she would be required to resolve disputed issues of material fact,
see Fla. Admin. Code. R. 65-2.056, .057, .060(1), .066; Lee Mem'l Health Sys. v.
Agency for Health Care Admin., 910 So. 2d 892, 893 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (citing Bundy v. Rudd, 366 So. 2d 440, 442 (Fla. 1978)); World Transp., Inc. v. Cent. Fla. Reg'l
Transp., 641 So. 2d 913, 914 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994) (explaining that the hearing officer's attempt to refute the movant's factual allegations in support of its claim of partiality constituted additional grounds for disqualification); see also Cherry Commc'ns, Inc. v.
Deason, 652 So. 2d 803, 804 (Fla. 1995) ("[W]e have held that the 'administrative context does not and need not match the judicial model,' but that an ' "impartial decision-maker is a basic constituent of minimum due process." ' " (quoting Ridgewood
Props., Inc. v. Dep't of Cmty. Affairs, 562 So. 2d 322, 323 (Fla. 1990))). Therefore, we reverse the final administrative decision and remand for a new hearing for which DCF's
Office of Appeal Hearings shall appoint a new hearing officer.
Reversed; remanded with directions.
CRENSHAW, J., and GENTILE, GEOFFREY H., ASSOCIATE JUDGE, Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- THE Florida BAR v. Sanford Freed, 366 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 1978)
- Dep't of Agric. & Consumer Servs. v. Broward Cnty., 810 So. 2d 1056 (Fla. 1st DCA 2002)
- Cherry Commc'ns, Inc. v. Deason, 652 So. 2d 803 (Fla. 1995)
- Ridgewood Props., Inc. v. Dep't OF Cmty. Affairs, 562 So. 2d 322 (Fla. 1990)
- LEE Mem'l Health Sys. v. State, 910 So. 2d 892 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005)
- Bundy v. Rudd, 366 So. 2d 440 (Fla. 1978)
- World Transp., Inc. v. Cent. Fla. Reg'l Transp., 641 So. 2d 913 (Fla. 5th DCA 1994)
- Williams v. State, 641 So. 2d 913 (Fla. 2d DCA 1994)