CopyCited 50 times | Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 2001 U.S. App. LEXIS 17693
...Moreover, Appellee did not want to move EHF from
the "auto row" on North Florida Avenue, and it believed the Bearss Avenue location was near some
undesirable businesses. Additionally, Appellee feared the relocation would generate protest litigation by
other dealerships pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 320.642....
CopyCited 34 times | Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
...Moreover, Appellee did not want to move
EHF from the “auto row” on North Florida Avenue, and it believed the Bearss
Avenue location was near some undesirable businesses. Additionally, Appellee
feared the relocation would generate protest litigation by other dealerships
pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 320.642....
CopyCited 11 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...on August 16, 1973. The hearing was completed on September 7, 1973. The evidence presented related primarily to one basic issue: Were Ford's licensed franchised motor vehicle dealers providing adequate representation in the subject community or territory? (See F.S. 320.642). The burden of proof in showing inadequate representation is placed by F.S. 320.642 on the "licensee"....
...We will consider the most vexing one first. It may be succinctly stated thusly: Was the procedure to be followed in considering the application for license by Smith governed by Chapter 70-424, Laws of Florida, enacted by the 1970 session of the Legislature, or by F.S. 320.642 as printed in the 1971 compilation of the Florida Statutes? Framed another way, was the Respondent (Director) authorized to hold hearings and pass upon the application for the license or was such the prerogative of the Department ? Respondent is the Director of the Division of Motor Vehicles....
...20.24) The heads of the various departments of government are granted powers and duties by F.S.
20.05. One of those powers is to employ an "executive director". (F.S.
20.05(7). It is apparent from a reading of the above mentioned statutes (and others) that the designations "Director" and "Department" are not synonymous. F.S.
320.642, Florida Statutes 1971, provides as follows: "The department shall deny an application for a motor vehicle dealer license in any community or territory where the licensee's presently licensed franchised motor vehicle dealer or dealers have...
...enged license could not have been validly issued by Respondent. Respondent urges that the above mentioned statutes do not govern and that the applicable law may be found in Chap. 70-424, Laws of Florida (hereinafter referred to as Chapter 70-424). F.S. 320.642 and part of F.S....
...ifferent meaning: "(a) `Department' means the department of highway safety and motor vehicles." (Emphasis added) F.S.
320.60(7), Florida Statutes 1971, was made to read: "(7) `Department' means the department of highway safety and motor vehicles." F.S.
320.642 and F.S....
...The matter included under the authority of this subsection shall be incorporated as enacted in any current session and shall be prima facie evidence of such law in all courts of the state." (Emphasis added) The administrative responsibility imposed on the "department" by Section 320.642, Florida Statutes 1971, therefore was ineffective, because the enrolled act, Chap....
...Sec.
11.2422). However, since Florida Statutes 1973 were not published prior to jurisdiction vesting in this Court, and were not in effect at the time of the actions giving rise to this controversy, we have no occasion to here consider their effect. Section
320.642, Florida Statutes, as printed in the 1971 Florida Statutes, therefore, is no more than prima facie evidence of the law then in effect. The enrolled act, Chap. 70-424, enacted by the Florida Legislature in 1970 stood as the official primary evidence of the law as enacted. It rebuts the prima facie effect of Section
320.642, Florida Statutes 1971....
...the Director's order, though we find from a re-examination of that case that it was mentioned in one sentence of the petitioner's brief. That case, therefore, has no application to the point now under consideration here. Implicit in Florida Statute 320.642 is the requirement that the Director's order be based upon an appropriate factual basis....
...for our review, we held that inasmuch as the director had found from the evidence presented to him that the existing licensee was furnishing adequate service in its locality, such finding precluded, by virtue of the mandatory language contained in F.S. 320.642, the entry of an order granting a new license....
CopyCited 8 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1991 WL 138127
...(Braman), challenges two final administrative orders from the Department of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles (Department) dismissing its petitions for formal proceedings due to its lack of standing. Braman asserts that it is entitled to standing under Sections
320.642,
320.699,
320.6992 and
120.57, Florida Statutes....
...ea and thus failed to qualify for a Department license. Braman moved to strike WWW's motion to dismiss on the grounds that WWW is not a party to the proceedings and the manufacturer or distributor of Cadillac Motor Division should be appearing under Section 320.642 "as the licensee is the party which has the burden of proof in an administrative hearing to establish the need for a new or expanded dealership by showing inadequate representation in the area." GM subsequently entered the proceedings...
...WWW is a proper party under Sections
320.64 and
320.27, Florida Statutes. General Motors Corporation (GM) also argued that Section
320.699(1)(a), Florida Statutes (Supp. 1988) did not set forth grounds for standing independent of those set forth in Section
320.642(3)(b), Florida Statutes....
...ensee by: (a) Filing with the department a request for a proceeding and an administrative hearing which conforms substantially with the requirements of s.
120.57; or (b) Filing with the department a written objection or notice of protest pursuant to s.
320.642....
...A hearing was held on the motion to strike, which Braman acknowledged was moot after GM joined WWW Enterprises in the proceedings. In his order on Braman's motion to strike, the hearing officer stated in part that Section
320.699 did not provide independent standing grounds beyond those expressed in Section
320.642. Braman requested another hearing, asserting that it met the standing requirements set forth under Section
320.642(3)(b)....
...and the existing Kendall-based Williamson Cadillac dealership share common ownership, such that the existing Williamson dealership and WWW Enterprises are essentially a single entity. [3] Braman thus argues that since it is located within the geographical and sales parameters of Section 320.642(3)(b) with respect to the existing Kendall-based Williamson dealership, Braman has standing to protest the proposed Homestead-based Williamson dealership. Section 320.642(3)(b), Florida Statutes (Supp....
...ny county continguous to the county where the additional or relocated dealer is proposed to be located. In his recommended order, the hearing officer recommended dismissal of Braman's petition. The hearing officer found that "nothing in the statute [Section 320.642(3)(b)] authorizes or requires an analysis of the shareholders of the proposed additional dealership, so that the protesting dealer can claim standing, based on [its proximity to] the location of or the sales made by some third dealership, such as Williamson Cadillac." The hearing officer further held that Braman did not meet the standing criteria of Section 320.642(3)(b). Braman asserted various exceptions which were denied. The Department adopted the recommended order and agreed with the hearing officer's denial of Braman's exceptions. Braman's primary argument is that the Department erred in construing Section 320.642(3)(b) to restrict standing. It therefore asserts that the Department's construction of the statute is impermissible since Braman qualifies under Section 320.642(3)(b), standing criteria with respect to the existing Kendall-based Williamson dealership, which through WWW Enterprises has essentially created a corporate alter *1050 ego in the proposed Homestead-based Williamson dealership....
...its retail sales of new motor vehicles to persons whose registered household addresses were located within a radius of 12.5 miles of the location of the proposed motor vehicle dealership during any 12 months of the last 36 months, as required under Section 320.642(3). We find that the Department's holding that Braman does not qualify under the Section 320.642 standing requirements is correct. First, a plain interpretation of the statute clearly shows that Braman is not located within any of the parameters necessary to confer standing upon it. The Section 320.642(3)(b) standing test clearly circumscribes the criteria which protesting parties must meet to contest the issuance of a new or additional dealership license....
...his provision. We have also reviewed Braman's other arguments, including their contention that Braman will suffer impairment of its contractual relationship with GM and find this argument to be without merit for purposes of conferring standing under Section 320.642....
...This section addresses the types of administrative hearings which the Legislature contemplated under Sections
320.60 to
320.70. Parties seeking to redress grievances may petition for a hearing under Section
120.57(1)(a) or may pursue an action under Section
320.642, if they file a "written objection or notice of protest." Under the plain language of Section
320.699(1), a dealer, such as Braman, must be "a directly and adversely affected party affected by the action or conduct of an applicant or licensee which is alleged to be in violation of any provision of ss....
CopyCited 7 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 17150
...That action the statutory revision service had no authority to take. * * * * * * [S]ince Florida Statutes 1973 were not published prior to jurisdiction vesting in this Court, and were not in effect at the time of the actions giving rise to this controversy, we have no occasion to here consider their effect. Section 320.642, Florida Statutes, as printed in the 1971 Florida Statutes, therefore, is no more than prima facie evidence of the law then in effect. The enrolled act, Chap. 70-424, enacted by the Florida Legislature in 1970 stood as the official primary evidence of the law as enacted. It rebuts the prima facie effect of Section 320.642, Florida Statutes 1971." Accordingly, the order below is REVERSED and the cause REMANDED with directions that the deficiency assessments against appellant be vacated and withdrawn....
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...Shovlain, the owner of Plantation Datsun, Inc., agreed to undertake the new dealership and invested money in a building and land. The three other dealers in Broward County protested the issuing of the license to operate the new dealership in accordance with § 320.642, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., and a hearing was held before the Director of Motor Vehicles. The director denied the license on the grounds that the existing dealers complied with licensee agreements and were providing adequate representation in the territory. We agree. Section 320.642, as a part of the comprehensive statute on motor vehicle licenses, reads as follows: "The department shall deny an application for a motor vehicle dealer license in any community or territory where the licensee's presently licensed fr...
...The legislature need not prescribe detailed rules to avoid a claim of unconstitutionality. It is *28 sufficient if the legislature declares the general policy, the public agency which is to apply it, and the boundaries of authority. McRae v. Robbins,
151 Fla. 109,
9 So.2d 284 (1942). A reading of Section
320.642, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., in the context of the entire chapter, shows that it meets the constitutional requirements for delegation of power....
...nts to the United States Constitution. The Supreme Court has held that if an economic regulation has some reasonable basis, it does not offend the constitution, Dandridge v. Williams,
397 U.S. 471,
90 S.Ct. 1153,
25 L.Ed.2d 491 (1970). The basis for Section
320.642 was ably expressed by the Wisconsin Supreme Court in construing a similar statute....
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...ecuted by Chevrolet Motor Division, General Motors Corporation, and Dealer." The director failed to make any finding that the "Primary Area of Responsibility of Dealer" is the same as, or different from, "the community or territory" referred to in F.S. 320.642....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 18755
...Four licensed Chevrolet dealers have petitioned for review of an order entered by the Director of the Division of Motor Vehicles licensing Marshall Berwick as a franchised Chevrolet dealer in Hollywood. Sec.
120.68, F.S. 1973. Petitioners urge that the Director granted the license in violation of §
320.642, F.S....
...The Director found that "there is a need *52 for a new dealer [in the Hollywood area] if Chevrolet is to be represented adequately and not lose its percentage of the market in the community." We agree with the Director, General Motors and Berwick that § 320.642 does not foreclose additional Chevrolet dealer representation in the "community or territory" the Miami multiple dealer area simply because each existing dealer now tends his own garden well and that the product of all twelve, taken together, is adequate by territorial standards....
...n concluding that the cultivation of the territory is not adequate. We agree with the Director that it would be unreasonable and arbitrary to deny General Motors and its chosen applicant the right to proceed under these circumstances. The purpose of § 320.642, F.S....
...l. Antitrust laws have proscribed such combinations in the United States since 1890 and in this State since 1915. Tit. 15 U.S.C. § 1 et seq.; Ch. 6933, Fla.Laws 1915 as amended, Ch. 542, F.S. 1973. Assuming as we do that the legislature in enacting § 320.642 intended "to serve the best interest of the people and the general welfare of the State" consistent with the purposes of the antitrust laws [ Abood v....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...tatutes, F.S.A., *115 to review the final order of respondent granting an application of Cycle World for a license as a motor vehicle dealer to sell Honda products in the Pensacola area. The statute governing issuing of such a license by respondent, Section 320.642, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., states as follows: "The department shall deny an application for a motor vehicle dealer license in any community or territory where the licensee's presently licensed franchised motor vehicle dealer or dealer...
CopyCited 3 times | Published | District Court, S.D. Florida | 20 Fed. R. Serv. 2d 49, 1975 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 14520
...ories, and parts on a credit basis for retail sale by East Coast. However, before East Coast could commence operations, it had to acquire a motor vehicle dealers license from the Department of Motor Vehicles of the State of Florida. Florida Statutes § 320.642 (1973)....
...from the Florida Department of Motor Vehicles. He also knew that if the Department of Motor Vehicles found there was adequate representation in the community by existing licensed franchised dealers, his application could be denied. Florida Statutes § 320.642....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...rior to the Director's order in the case sub judice but subsequent to the hearing. The rule states in pertinent part as follows: "* * * Upon receipt of such notice the Director shall be authorized to proceed with making the determination required by Section 320.642, Florida Statutes, and shall cause a notice to be sent to the presently licensed franchised dealers for the same make or makes of vehicles in the territory or community in which the new dealership proposes to locate, advising such dealers of the provisions of Section 320.642, Florida Statutes, and giving them and all real parties in interest an opportunity to be heard on the matters specified in that Section. The Director may make such further investigation and hold such hearing as he deems necessary to determine the questions specified under Section 320.642....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal
...441, is one of two dealerships in adjacent Dade County and is located 4.6 miles south of the proposed location of Hollywood Isuzu. The contractual arrangement between the licensee and its dealers does not assign a specific or exclusive area of responsibility or territory to the dealer. Section 320.642, Florida Statutes (1981), establishes the standard for the issuance or denial of a motor vehicle dealer license: "The Department shall deny an application for a motor vehicle dealer license in any community or territory where the lice...
...he site of a cluster of competing imported car dealers, was a logical location for Isuzu, and that by locating there, Isuzu's visibility would be increased and its Miami metropolitan sales stimulated. Finally, keeping in mind that: "[t]he purpose of § 320.642, F.S....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1988 WL 105206
...Anthony Abraham Chevrolet appeals a final order of the Department of Highway Safety & Motor Vehicles dismissing its second amended petition with prejudice. Appellant contends that its amended petition for an administrative hearing alleged sufficient facts to survive the motion to dismiss, and that section 320.642, Florida Statutes, applies to dealer relocations....
...territory" of the protestant, and if the proposed relocation is within the same "community or territory," then the proposed change of location does not implicate the substantial interests of the protestant, protected within the zone of interests of Section 320.642, Florida Statutes....
...ch would bring Abraham and Collection within the final scenario which could establish standing in Abraham. (R. 93-95) (emphasis in the original). The hearing officer dismissed Abraham's second amended petition with prejudice, concluding that neither § 320.642 nor Fla....
...Code Rule 15C-1.08 granted the Department jurisdiction to deny an application for change of address based solely upon the protest of another dealer in the same county, and that economic injury alone to existing dealers was not a cognizable factor under § 320.642....
...The Department adopted the recommended order as its own and ordered that (1) Abraham's second amended complaint be dismissed with prejudice, and (2) Collection's application for relocation be approved following Collection's compliance with all applicable provisions of §
320.27. The first issue is whether §
320.642, Fla. Stat. (1985), applies to dealer relocations within the same territory or community. [3] Nothing in the language of the statute precludes application of section
320.642 to dealer relocations in situations such as the one before us. The hearing officer even concedes that Abraham would have standing if it "sought to relocate closer to the protestant's borders in such a way that applicant's and protestant's communities/territories overlap." We hold, therefore, that §
320.642, Fla....
...Although that section cannot be retroactively applied to the case before us, it is indicative of legislative intent. We also hold that Abraham's amended petition sufficiently alleges that Collection's relocation would intrude into its community or territory within the meaning of section 320.642 and, therefore, that Abraham has standing to assert its rights in this administrative proceeding....
...rimary Responsibility designated by Agreement between ABRAHAM and GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION (see attached Exhibit "A"), thereby resulting in economic injury to ABRAHAM. The injury alleged is within the zone of injury contemplated by Florida Statute 320.642, and the Florida Constitution....
...Exhibit "A" is a map of the area of "Primary Responsibility" designated by agreement between Abraham and General Motors Corporation. [2] This decision was not published in Florida Administrative Law Reports. [3] At the time of the proceedings below section 320.642, Florida Statutes (1985), provided: The department shall deny an application for a motor vehicle dealer license in any community or territory where the licensee's presently licensed franchised motor vehicle dealer or dealers have comp...
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit | 1982 U.S. App. LEXIS 19866
...rmed Gables that its status as a “replacement dealer” had been cleared through the Department. 1 In the context of Florida’s statutory procedure for licensing motor vehicle dealers, the designation “replacement dealer” has special meaning. Section 320.642 provides: The department shall deny an application for a motor vehicle dealer license in any community or territory where the licensee’s presently licensed franchised motor vehicle dealer or dealers have complied with licensee’s agreements and are providing adequate representation in the community or territory for such licensee. The burden of proof in showing inadequate representation shall be on the licensee. Fla.Stat. § 320.642 (1979)....
...pportunity to protest the issuance of a new license. This Rule also provides that the Department may convene a hearing if necessary to determine whether the application for a license should be granted or denied according to the criteria set forth in section 320.642....
...In its order, the Department found that both Fiat Motors and Gables had acted under the belief that Gables would in fact be no more than a replacement dealer for the former Dade County franchise. It further found that the criteria for denying a license in section 320.642 had not been established....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1993 WL 366884
...On appeal, appellants address only rule 15C-1.008, which they argue is inconsistent with chapter 320, Florida Statutes (1989); and exceeds the rulemaking authority granted to the Department by the legislature. We affirm. Rule 15C-1.008 is intended principally to implement section 320.642, Florida Statutes, which addresses the procedure to be followed to determine whether an application for a motor vehicle dealer license should be granted when a manufacturer, factory branch, distributor or importer of motor vehicles "proposes to establish an additional ... dealership or permit the relocation of an existing dealer to a location within a community or territory where the same line-make vehicle is presently represented by a franchised ... dealer or dealers." § 320.642(1), Fla....
...s who register new motor vehicle retail sales or retail leases of the same line-make in the community or territory of the proposed dealership are not providing adequate representation of such line-make motor vehicles in such community or territory." § 320.642(2)(a)1....
...Stat. (1989). Subsection (2) requires, further, that, in making a determination regarding the adequacy of existing representation in the community or territory, the Department consider evidence directed to certain enumerated issues, or "questions." § 320.642(2)(b), Fla. Stat. (1989). Appellants object only to the last portion of rule 15C-1.008, which reads: The Director may make such further investigation and hold such hearing as he deems necessary to determine the questions specified under Section 320.642....
...er, or date of final judicial determination in the event of an appeal, unless for good cause a different period is set by the Director in his order of determination. (Emphasis added.) Appellants argue that, because no such time limit is contained in section 320.642, the Department lacks the authority to adopt one by rule....
...e dealers and manufacturers, maintaining competition, providing consumer protection and fair trade and providing minorities with opportunities for full participation as motor vehicle dealers." §
320.605, Fla. Stat. (1989). "The purpose of [section]
320.642 ......
...isting and prospective." Bill Kelley Chevrolet, Inc. v. Calvin,
322 So.2d 50, 52 (Fla. 1st DCA 1975), cert. denied,
336 So.2d 1180 (Fla. 1976). Accord Plantation Datsun, Inc. v. Calvin,
275 So.2d 26 (Fla. 1st DCA 1973). Consistent with that purpose, section
320.642(2) requires the Department to determine whether an additional (either new or relocated) dealership is justified, economically and otherwise, from the viewpoints of the existing dealers and the public, respectively....
...Clearly, such data changes over time, as does the economy. What may be a perfectly defensible determination based upon today's data, might well prove to be indefensible at some point in the future. It seems to us that, in order effectively to administer section 320.642, it is essential that the Department have the authority to limit the life of a determination made pursuant to that section....
...The dealership, to be operated by appellant herein, was to have an annual sales volume of up to 1,360 cars and trucks, and would require 213,825 square feet of property. In May 1988, appellant, after complying with the requirements of sections
320.27 and
320.642, Florida Statutes, sent its preliminary application for franchise motor vehicle license to the Department....
...proval. The Department informed appellant that this approval would expire at the end of one year, unless appellants complied with certain requirements which were not then explicated in any statute or rule. [3] The Department and the majority rely on section 320.642, Florida Statutes, which rule 15C-1.008 purports to implement, as authority for the rule....
...can in good faith carry on such business and keep and maintain books, records, and files necessary to conduct such business, which will be available at all reasonable hours to inspection by the department or any of its inspectors or other employees. Section 320.642 sets forth detailed procedures governing notice to other dealers. If an existing dealer protests, time-consuming, expensive litigation follows in which the Department must weigh evidence relevant to eleven different factors, in determining whether to grant the application. § 320.642, Fla....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal
...e on the ground that petitioner failed to show that the existing dealers were not complying with their franchise *1288 agreements or had failed to show that the existing dealers were not providing adequate representation in the territory pursuant to § 320.642, Fla....
...Petitioner then forwarded to respondent written confirmation from the distributor stating that the letter of intent was still in effect and requested that Mr. Whitney withdraw his previous letter. The only response was an order setting the application for hearing pursuant to § 320.642, Fla....
...Please acknowledge your understanding of the above by signing below." Mr. Goldstein's name is then signed below in the space provided. Respondent was correct in construing the application filed by Home Volkswagen, Inc., as a new application to be processed under § 320.642, Fla....
...Although Home Volkswagen, Inc., is at present a wholly owned subsidiary of Volkswagen South, Inc., it is a separate corporation and its ownership could be readily changed (as pointed out by Goldstein's previously quoted letter of December 13, 1971). It was certainly not the intent of the legislature that the provisions of § 320.642, Fla....
...d the record made at the hearing on the application does not show that the existing dealers were not complying with their franchise agreements or that they had failed to provide adequate representation to the licensee in the territory as required by § 320.642, Fla....
...In its petition for rehearing, petitioner contends that our opinion was in error in characterizing the original application of Volkswagen South, Inc., as an application under §
320.27(5), Fla. Stat. It contends that the application was filed under §
320.642, Fla....
...It pertains to new motor vehicle license applications and subsection (5) thereof applies to supplemental licenses. Subsection (5) authorizes issuance of a supplemental license to a previously licensed dealer for an additional place of business not contiguous to the premises for which the original license was issued. § 320.642 states as follows in relation to denial of a motor vehicle dealer license: "The department shall deny an application for a motor vehicle dealer license in any community or territory where the *1291 licensee's presently licensed franchised...
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2011 Fla. App. LEXIS 19724, 2011 WL 6117218
...epartment of Highway Safety and Motor Vehicles ("Department"), which concluded that the establishment by Chrysler Group LLC ("Chrysler Group") of North Tampa Chrysler Jeep Dodge, Inc. (North Tampa), a successor motor vehicle dealer, was exempt under section 320.642(5)(a)1, Florida Statutes (2010), from the notice and protest requirements in sections 320.642(1)-(3), Florida Statutes (2010)....
...Chrysler Group received confirmation from an employee of the Department via email, based on information Chrysler Group provided the employee via email on February 5, 2010, that North Tampa would be exempt from the notice and protest requirements of section 320.642(5)(a)1, Florida Statutes (2010)....
...er, Dodge, and Jeep dealership. The Department issued the dealer license to North Tampa. Ulm and Ferman filed a petition with the Department for determination that Chrysler Group had established an additional motor vehicle dealership in violation of section 320.642....
...The Department forwarded the petition to the Division of Administrative Hearings. After an evidentiary hearing, the administrative law judge ("ALJ") entered a Recommended Order concluding that the establishment of North Tampa is exempt from the notice and protest requirements of section 320.642. The ALJ found that the doctrine of equitable tolling applied to the facts of this case to toll the start of the twelve-month exemption period under section 320.642(5)(a) until March 10, 2009, the date Chrysler Group terminated Wilson's dealer agreements....
...Baptist Hosp. of Fla., Inc. v. Welker,
908 So.2d 317, 319 (Fla.2005) ("This question involves a pure question of law and thus is subject to de novo review.") (italics added); Steward v. Dep't of Children & Families,
865 So.2d 528, 530 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004). Section
320.642 regulates a licensee's ability to establish an additional dealership in a market. If the licensee desires to establish an additional dealership in a market, the licensee must give notice to the Department of its intent to establish an additional dealership. §
320.642(1). After receiving the licensee's notice, the Department shall publish a notice of the proposed additional dealership in the Florida Administrative Weekly, whereupon dealers who have standing may file a petition protesting the proposal. §
320.642(1)-(3). However, the statute also provides exemptions from the statutory notice and protest requirements. §
320.642(5). Whether Chrysler Group is entitled to an exemption from the statutory notice and protest requirements is the issue in this appeal. Section
320.642(5)(a)1 allows an exemption to the statutory notice and protest requirements if a successor motor vehicle dealer is opened or reopened within twelve months and is within the same or adjacent county and is within two miles of the former dealership's location....
...on for a license to permit the reopening of the same dealer or a successor dealer within twelve months of the license revocation or surrender shall not be considered the establishment of an additional dealership if one of the conditions set forth in Section 320.642(5), Florida Statutes, is met by the proposed dealer....
...welve-month exemption period under the Rule. We must, therefore, determine whether the Department erred as a matter of law in determining that the doctrine of equitable tolling applied to toll the beginning of the twelve-month exemption period under section 320.642(5)(a) until March 10, 2009....
...Therefore, even if the doctrine of equitable tolling applied to the facts of this case, it tolled the effective date of Wilson's license termination to February 9, 2009. III. Conclusion Accordingly, the establishment of North Tampa by Chrysler Group is not exempt under section 320.642(5)(a)1 from the notice and protest requirements in sections 320.642(1)-(3)....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 5815, 2004 WL 893181
...assee. For purposes of this opinion, we need not discuss the complicated factual background of Capital’s claim. In order to bring its franchise rights into fruition, Ward needed to obtain a dealership license from DHSMV. ITEC recognized that under section 320.642(8), Florida Statutes (2001), “An existing franchised motor vehicle dealer or dealers [meeting certain geographical conditions] shall have standing to protest a proposed additional or relocated motor vehicle dealer where the existing...
...On May 19, 2003, the circuit court entered an order finding that Capital “is not entitled to any rights and privileges ... as a dealer that is the holder of a motor vehicle franchise.” The order thus extinguished any rights claimed by Capital under section 320.642(3)....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1974 Fla. App. LEXIS 6943
...Marine, Inc. v. Calvin, Fla.App.,
296 So.2d 114 , in which this court’s opinion has been filed on this date. *116 The rulings of this court in Hess Marine, Inc., likewise apply in this case. Respondent’s findings do not meet the requirements of Section
320.642, Florida Statutes, F.S.A., for .the granting of this application and preclude the granting of same since respondent affirmatively found that the presently licensed franchise dealer is furnishing adequate service in its locality....
CopyPublished | Supreme Court of Florida | 1976 Fla. LEXIS 4344
...was chosen by Ford Motor Company as the successor franchisee and a license to act as a Ford franchised dealer was issued to Crown Ford, Inc. on December 1, 1975. Petitioners complain that, when issuing the license to Crown Ford, Respondents did not comply with Section 320.642, Florida Statutes, or Rule 15C-1.08, Florida Administrative Code....
...Rule 1 SC-1.08 was not in effect at the time the license was issued because it was stricken from the files of the Department of State on October 1, 1975 in accord with Section
120.72(4) (a), Florida Statutes. Therefore the rule is not applicable to this case. Section
320.642, Florida Statutes, states: “
320.642 Dealer licenses in areas previously served....
...munity or territory for such licensee. The burden of proof in showing inadequate representation shall be on the licensee.” *615 Director Calvin has determined that a replacement dealer, such as Crown Ford, Inc., does not come within the purview of Section 320.642, since the statute applies to the establishment of new dealerships and not to a replacement dealer....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1978 Fla. App. LEXIS 15481
with making the determination required by Section 320.-642, Florida Statutes, and shall cause a notice
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1975 Fla. App. LEXIS 13963
Vehicles with directions to hold a hearing under Section
320.642, Florida Statutes, with notice to and an opportunity
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1990 Fla. App. LEXIS 1612, 1990 WL 25938
...nse. Appellant contends that the Bill Kelley I and II rulings required appellee General Motors Corporation (GM) to prove inadequate dealer representation by a different method than the method used and accepted by the agency in the proceedings below. Section 320.642, Florida Statutes (1987), requires denial of new dealer licenses to establish additional dealerships in a “community or territory” where existing dealers are already adequately representing their manufacturers and are in compliance with their franchise agreements....
...on if it could show “an identifiable plot not yet cultivated, which could be expected to flourish if given the attention which the others in their turns received.” Bill Kelley II,
322 So.2d at 51 . The court further noted that the purpose behind Section
320.642, Florida Statutes, was “not to foster combinations to prevent the introduction of dealer competition which is reasonably justified in terms of market potential,” and concluded (
322 So.2d at 52 ): [W]e decline to transform the non...
...actual determination of whether the MDA was, or was not, the community or territory in that case. In short, while the MDA specified in the franchise agreement is entitled to great weight in determining the relevant “community or territory” under Section 320.642, Florida Statutes, it is not conclusive of the question....
CopyPublished | Florida 4th District Court of Appeal | 2016 WL 3065645, 2016 Fla. App. LEXIS 8326
...e dealers and manufacturers,
maintaining competition, providing consumer protection and fair trade
and providing minorities with opportunities for full participation as motor
vehicle dealers.” §
320.605, Fla. Stat. (2014). To that end, it enacted
section
320.642, which outlines the procedures for obtaining a license to
relocate an existing dealership or establish a new dealership in an existing
market. §
320.642, Fla. Stat. (2014). Under section
320.642, the potential
licensee must notify the Department of its intent to establish an additional
dealership and the Department must then, in turn, publish a notice in the
Florida Administrative Register. §
320.642(1), Fla. Stat. (2014). At that
point, an existing dealership may protest the proposed dealership so long
as the existing dealership has standing. §
320.642(2)-(3).
In counties with a population exceeding 300,000 people (such as
Broward County), “[a]n existing franchised motor vehicle dealer or dealers
shall have standing to protest a proposed additional or relocated motor
vehicle deale...
...dealership, such dealer or its predecessor made 25 percent of its retail
sales of new motor vehicles to persons whose registered household
addresses were located within a radius of 12.5 miles of the location of the
proposed additional or relocated motor vehicle dealer.” § 320.642(3)(b)1.-
2., Fla....
...peal, unless
clearly erroneous.” Braman Cadillac, Inc. v. Dep’t of Highway Safety &
Motor Vehicles,
584 So. 2d 1047, 1050 (Fla. 1st DCA 1991).
Recovery Racing takes issue with the Department’s interpretation of the
25% Test as set forth in section
320.642, arguing that it erroneously
placed the burden of proving standing on Recovery Racing and construed
the data points contained in the 25% Test contrary to the statute’s plain
language....
...4th DCA 2013) (lack of standing is an affirmative defense which
must be raised by the defendant). As such, it maintains that the Proposed
Dealership and Maserati bore the burden of proving that Recovery Racing
lacked standing. We reject Recovery Racing’s argument because section
320.642(3)(b)2. provides that an existing dealer has standing to protest a
proposed dealership under the 25% Test if it “can establish that” it meets
the criteria. § 320.642(3)(b)2., Fla....
...(2014). This plain language
places the burden squarely on the existing dealer to show its standing. 1
See id.; see also Braman Cadillac, Inc.,
584 So. 2d at 1050 (affirming
because the existing dealer “cannot meet [the standing] requirements” of
section
320.642(3)(b)”).
1 Indeed, in the administrative context, the burden is typically on the
petitioner/intervenor to establish it has standing at the outset....
...
320.02(2)(a). In light of these considerations, the term “registered home
addresses” clearly refers to the addresses where the vehicles are registered
with the Department. Interpreting the phrase any other way would ignore
the implications of section
320.642’s location within Chapter 320....
...2007)
(interpreting a term contained in a statute by reading the section “in pari
materia with related provisions” of the chapter in which it was located).
Accordingly, the Department did not err in its interpretation of the term
“registered household addresses” as used in section 320.642(3)(b)2.
6
Our holding concerning the definition of the term “registered household
addresses” is dispositive to this case....
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 15417
...the Director [of the Division of Motor Vehicles] . . . shall cause a notice to be sent to the presently licensed franchised dealers for the same make or makes of vehicles in the territory or community in which the new dealership proposes to locate advising such dealers of the provisions of Section 320.642, Florida Statutes, and giving them and all real parties in interest an opportunity to be heard on the matters specified in that Section.” The Division granted Evans’ requested amendment in April, 1978, without holding an evidentia...
CopyPublished | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 1880, 1987 Fla. App. LEXIS 9647
establishment of the new dealership under the terms of §
320.642, Florida Statutes (1985), which statute provides:
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 1993 Fla. App. LEXIS 8937, 1993 WL 328485
...and the effect of a relocation. For instance, when applying for a license, which must be annually renewed, the manufacturer is required to notify the Department of all its authorized dealers and their addresses. Section
320.63(3), Fla.Stat. (1989). Section
320.642(1), Florida Statutes (1989), provides that once a manufacturer proposes to establish an additional motor vehicle dealership or permit the relocation of an existing dealership, notice must be published in Florida Administrative Weekly, so as to allow similar dealers in the area the opportunity to respond. When a manufacturer contends that existing dealers are not adequately supplying a particular territory, the Department may consider whether the manufacturer has attempted to coerce an existing dealer to relocate. Section
320.642(2)(b)(5), Fla.Stat....
...Finally, no existing dealer has grounds to protest when a dealership is reopened or a successor dealership is opened within twelve months, if it is within two miles of the former location, because it would not be considered an additional dealership. Section 320.642(5)(a), Fla.Stat....
