8 Florida opinions name it 1 courts 1981–2008 0 in the last five years
The cases below were cited by Florida courts in a sentence that names this issue. Sides come from how each citing opinion treated the case (Syfertize flag on that citation), so a case can appear on both: that is where the law is contested. A red or yellow chip is the case's own overall treatment.
| Case | Followed | Cited |
|---|---|---|
Allen v. School Bd. of Dade Countygreen1 sentence1996Allen v. School Bd. of Dade Co., 571 So.2d 568, 569 (Fla. 3d DCA 1990) (“The School Board is allowed to increase the penalty recommended by the hearing officer provided that it reviews the complete record and states with particularity its reasons for increasing the penalty.”). | 1 | 1 |
Couch v. Commission on Ethicsgreen1 sentence1995We conclude that appellant "cannot argue on appeal matters which were not properly excepted to or challenged before the [agency] and thus were not preserved for appellate review." Couch v. Commission on Ethics, 617 So.2d 1119, 1124 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); see also Environmental Coalition of Florida, Inc. v. Broward County, 586 So.2d 1212 , 1213 n. 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Florida Dep't of Corrections v. Bradley, 510 So.2d 1122, 1123-24 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). | 1 | 1 |
Envtl. Coalition of Fla., Inc. v. Broward Countygreen1 sentence1995We conclude that appellant "cannot argue on appeal matters which were not properly excepted to or challenged before the [agency] and thus were not preserved for appellate review." Couch v. Commission on Ethics, 617 So.2d 1119, 1124 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); see also Environmental Coalition of Florida, Inc. v. Broward County, 586 So.2d 1212 , 1213 n. 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Florida Dep't of Corrections v. Bradley, 510 So.2d 1122, 1123-24 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). | 1 | 1 |
Florida Dept. of Corrections v. Bradleygreen1 sentence1995We conclude that appellant "cannot argue on appeal matters which were not properly excepted to or challenged before the [agency] and thus were not preserved for appellate review." Couch v. Commission on Ethics, 617 So.2d 1119, 1124 (Fla. 5th DCA 1993); see also Environmental Coalition of Florida, Inc. v. Broward County, 586 So.2d 1212 , 1213 n. 1 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Florida Dep't of Corrections v. Bradley, 510 So.2d 1122, 1123-24 (Fla. 1st DCA 1987). | 1 | 1 |
McDonald v. Dept. of Banking and Financegreen1 sentence1981Rotstein's appeal makes no point of any deficiencies in the Board's order, so it seems inappropriate to inquire in this case whether any other sections of Chapter 120, where McDonald v. Dept. of Banking and Finance, 346 So.2d 569, 582 (Fla. 1st DCA 1977) found a duty to explicate the exercise of discretion, may impose that duty on license-revoking agencies. | 1 | 1 |
| Case | Negative | Cited |
|---|---|---|
| No negative-treatment citations attached to this issue in Florida. Read the followed side critically anyway. | ||
| Case | Cited | Years |
|---|---|---|
FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COM'N v. Webb
green
2 sentences1983While we agree that the Florida Real Estate Commission had the power to increase the penalty recommended by the hearing officer, see Florida Real Estate Commission v. Webb, 367 So.2d 201 (Fla. 1978), we nevertheless reverse and remand for imposition of an appropriate penalty consistent with the dictates of section 475.-25(1), Florida Statutes (1981), see Linkous v. Department of Professional Regulation, 417 So.2d 802 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). 1981(Emphasis added.) [2] Webb squarely rejects the argument that Section 120.57(1)(b)9 requires a license-revoking agency "to explain its rationale for increasing the penalty recommended by the hearing officer." 367 So.2d at 204 . | 4 | 1981–1990 |
Cartaya v. DEPT. OF BUS. AND PROF. REG.
green
1 sentence2008In Cartaya v. Department of Business and Professional Regulation, 919 So.2d 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 2006), the court held that where the penalty from the recommended order was increased without adequate explanation of the reasons, remand was required. [1] Likewise, the Third District held that where a final order failed to give reasons for increase in penalty, as required by section 120.57, the proper remedy was to reverse the order under review and remand the cause to the Florida Board of Medical Examiners with directions to enter a new final order in this cause which either (a) accepts the penalty | 1 | 2008–2008 |
Hambley v. DEPT. OF PRO. REGULATION, DIV. OF REAL ESTATE
neutral
1 sentence1991Bradley v. Criminal Justice Standards & Training Commission, 577 So.2d 638 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Bajrangi v. Department of Business Regulation, 561 So.2d 410 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Hambley v. Department of Professional Regulation, 568 So.2d 970 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Bajrangi v. DEPT. OF BUSINESS REG.
neutral
1 sentence1991Bradley v. Criminal Justice Standards & Training Commission, 577 So.2d 638 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Bajrangi v. Department of Business Regulation, 561 So.2d 410 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Hambley v. Department of Professional Regulation, 568 So.2d 970 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Bradley v. CRIMINAL JUSTICE STANDARDS AND TRAINING COM'N
green
1 sentence1991Bradley v. Criminal Justice Standards & Training Commission, 577 So.2d 638 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991); Bajrangi v. Department of Business Regulation, 561 So.2d 410 (Fla. 5th DCA 1990); Hambley v. Department of Professional Regulation, 568 So.2d 970 (Fla. 2d DCA 1990). | 1 | 1991–1991 |
Linkous v. DEPARTMENT OF PROF. REG.
green
1 sentence1983While we agree that the Florida Real Estate Commission had the power to increase the penalty recommended by the hearing officer, see Florida Real Estate Commission v. Webb, 367 So.2d 201 (Fla. 1978), we nevertheless reverse and remand for imposition of an appropriate penalty consistent with the dictates of section 475.-25(1), Florida Statutes (1981), see Linkous v. Department of Professional Regulation, 417 So.2d 802 (Fla. 5th DCA 1982). | 1 | 1983–1983 |
Counted by distinct opinions that both name this issue and are annotated to the section; sections every opinion cites regardless of issue are not filtered here, so read the counts against the total above.