Personal Injury Lawyer

Florida Statute 489.129 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research

F.S. 489.129 Case Law from Google Scholar
Statute is currently reporting as:

Link to State of Florida Official Statute Google Search for Amendments to 489.129

The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Title XXXII
REGULATION OF PROFESSIONS AND OCCUPATIONS

Chapter 489
CONTRACTING

View Entire Chapter

F.S. 489.129

489.129 Disciplinary proceedings.—

(1) The board may take any of the following actions against any certificateholder or registrant: place on probation or reprimand the licensee, revoke, suspend, or deny the issuance or renewal of the certificate or registration, require financial restitution to a consumer for financial harm directly related to a violation of a provision of this part, impose an administrative fine not to exceed $10,000 per violation, require continuing education, or assess costs associated with investigation and prosecution, if the contractor, financially responsible officer, or business organization for which the contractor is a primary qualifying agent, a financially responsible officer, or a secondary qualifying agent responsible under s. 489.1195 is found guilty of any of the following acts:

(a) Obtaining a certificate or registration by fraud or misrepresentation.

(b) Being convicted or found guilty of, or entering a plea of nolo contendere to, regardless of adjudication, a crime in any jurisdiction which directly relates to the practice of contracting or the ability to practice contracting.

(d) Performing any act which assists a person or entity in engaging in the prohibited uncertified and unregistered practice of contracting, if the certificateholder or registrant knows or has reasonable grounds to know that the person or entity was uncertified and unregistered.

(e) Knowingly combining or conspiring with an uncertified or unregistered person by allowing his or her certificate or registration to be used by the uncertified or unregistered person with intent to evade the provisions of this part. When a certificateholder or registrant allows his or her certificate or registration to be used by one or more business organizations without having any active participation in the operations, management, or control of such business organizations, such act constitutes prima facie evidence of an intent to evade the provisions of this part.

(f) Acting in the capacity of a contractor under any certificate or registration issued hereunder except in the name of the certificateholder or registrant as set forth on the issued certificate or registration, or in accordance with the personnel of the certificateholder or registrant as set forth in the application for the certificate or registration, or as later changed as provided in this part.

(g) Committing mismanagement or misconduct in the practice of contracting that causes financial harm to a customer. Financial mismanagement or misconduct occurs when:

1. Valid liens have been recorded against the property of a contractor’s customer for supplies or services ordered by the contractor for the customer’s job; the contractor has received funds from the customer to pay for the supplies or services; and the contractor has not had the liens removed from the property, by payment or by bond, within 75 days after the date of such liens;

2. The contractor has abandoned a customer’s job and the percentage of completion is less than the percentage of the total contract price paid to the contractor as of the time of abandonment, unless the contractor is entitled to retain such funds under the terms of the contract or refunds the excess funds within 30 days after the date the job is abandoned; or

3. The contractor’s job has been completed, and it is shown that the customer has had to pay more for the contracted job than the original contract price, as adjusted for subsequent change orders, unless such increase in cost was the result of circumstances beyond the control of the contractor, was the result of circumstances caused by the customer, or was otherwise permitted by the terms of the contract between the contractor and the customer.

(h) Being disciplined by any municipality or county for an act or violation of this part.

(i) Failing in any material respect to comply with the provisions of this part or violating a rule or lawful order of the board.

(j) Abandoning a construction project in which the contractor is engaged or under contract as a contractor. A project may be presumed abandoned after 90 days if the contractor terminates the project without just cause or without proper notification to the owner, including the reason for termination, or fails to perform work without just cause for 90 consecutive days.

(k) Signing a statement with respect to a project or contract falsely indicating that the work is bonded; falsely indicating that payment has been made for all subcontracted work, labor, and materials which results in a financial loss to the owner, purchaser, or contractor; or falsely indicating that workers’ compensation and public liability insurance are provided.

(l) Committing fraud or deceit in the practice of contracting.

(m) Committing incompetency or misconduct in the practice of contracting.

(n) Committing gross negligence, repeated negligence, or negligence resulting in a significant danger to life or property.

(o) Proceeding on any job without obtaining applicable local building department permits and inspections.

(p) Intimidating, threatening, coercing, or otherwise discouraging the service of a notice to owner under part I of chapter 713 or a notice to contractor under chapter 255 or part I of chapter 713.

(q) Failing to satisfy within a reasonable time, the terms of a civil judgment obtained against the licensee, or the business organization qualified by the licensee, relating to the practice of the licensee’s profession.

(r) Committing misapplication of construction funds in violation of s. 713.345. If a contractor, subcontractor, sub-subcontractor, or other person licensed by the board under this chapter is convicted of misapplication of construction funds, the board must suspend all licenses issued to such licensee under this chapter for a minimum of 1 year from the date of conviction. The suspension required under this paragraph is not exclusive, and the board may impose any additional penalties set forth in this subsection.

For the purposes of this subsection, construction is considered to be commenced when the contract is executed and the contractor has accepted funds from the customer or lender. A contractor does not commit a violation of this subsection when the contractor relies on a building code interpretation rendered by a building official or person authorized by s. 553.80 to enforce the building code, absent a finding of fraud or deceit in the practice of contracting, or gross negligence, repeated negligence, or negligence resulting in a significant danger to life or property on the part of the building official, in a proceeding under chapter 120.

(2) If a registrant or certificateholder disciplined under subsection (1) is a qualifying agent or financially responsible officer for a business organization and the violation was performed in connection with a construction project undertaken by that business organization, the board may impose an additional administrative fine not to exceed $5,000 per violation against the business organization or against any partner, officer, director, trustee, or member if such person participated in the violation or knew or should have known of the violation and failed to take reasonable corrective action.

(3) The board may specify by rule the acts or omissions which constitute violations of this section.

(4) In recommending penalties in any proposed recommended final order, the department shall follow the penalty guidelines established by the board by rule. The department shall advise the administrative law judge of the appropriate penalty, including mitigating and aggravating circumstances, and the specific rule citation.

(5) The board may not reinstate the certification or registration of, or cause a certificate or registration to be issued to, a person who or business organization which the board has determined is unqualified or whose certificate or registration the board has suspended until it is satisfied that such person or business organization has complied with all the terms and conditions set forth in the final order and is capable of competently engaging in the business of contracting.

(6)(a) The board may assess interest or penalties on all fines imposed under this chapter against any person or business organization which has not paid the imposed fine by the due date established by rule or final order. The provisions of chapter 120 do not apply to such assessment. Interest rates to be imposed shall be established by rule and shall not be usurious.

(b) Venue for all actions to enforce any fine levied by the board shall be in Duval County. The board is authorized to enter into contracts with private businesses or attorneys to collect such fines with payment for such collections made on a contingent fee basis. All such contracts shall be publicly advertised and competitively awarded based upon responses submitted to a request for proposals developed by the board.

(7) The board shall not issue or renew a certificate or registration to any person or business organization that has been assessed a fine, interest, or costs associated with investigation and prosecution, or has been ordered to pay restitution, until such fine, interest, or costs associated with investigation and prosecution or restitution are paid in full or until all terms and conditions of the final order have been satisfied.

(8) If the board finds any certified or registered contractor guilty of a violation, the board may, as part of its disciplinary action, require such contractor to obtain continuing education in the areas of contracting affected by such violation.

(9) Any person certified or registered pursuant to this part who has had his or her license revoked shall not be eligible to be a partner, officer, director, or trustee of a business organization defined by this section or be employed in a managerial or supervisory capacity for a 5-year period. Such person shall also be ineligible to reapply for certification or registration under this part for a period of 5 years after the effective date of the revocation.

(10) If a business organization or any of its partners, officers, directors, trustees, or members is or has previously been fined for violating subsection (2) or s. 489.132, the board may, on that basis alone, revoke, suspend, place on probation, or deny issuance of a certificate or registration to a qualifying agent or financially responsible officer of that business organization.

(11)(a) Notwithstanding the provisions of chapters 120 and 455, upon receipt of a legally sufficient consumer complaint alleging a violation of this part, the department may provide by rule for binding arbitration between the complainant and the certificateholder or registrant, provided the following conditions exist:

1. There is evidence that the complainant has suffered or is likely to suffer monetary damages resulting from the violation of this part;

2. The certificateholder or registrant does not have a history of repeated or similar violations;

3. Reasonable grounds exist to believe that the public interest will be better served by arbitration than by disciplinary action; and

4. The complainant and certificateholder or registrant have not previously entered into private arbitration, and no civil court action based on the same transaction has been filed.

(b) The certificateholder or registrant and the complainant may consent in writing to binding arbitration within 15 days following notification of this process by the department. The department may suspend all action in the matter for 45 days when notice of consent to binding arbitration is received by the department. If the arbitration process is successfully concluded within the 60-day period, the department may close the case file with a notation of the disposition and the licensee’s record shall reflect only that a complaint was filed and resolved through arbitration.

(c) Where a complaint meets the criteria for arbitration set forth in paragraph (a) and the damages at issue are less than $2,500, the department shall refer the complaint for mandatory arbitration.

(d) The arbitrator’s order shall become a final order of the board if not challenged by the complainant or the certificateholder or registrant within 30 days after filing. The board’s review of the arbitrator’s order shall operate in the manner of the review of recommended orders pursuant to s. 120.57(1) and shall not be a de novo review.

(12) When an investigation of a contractor is undertaken, the department shall promptly furnish to the contractor or the contractor’s attorney a copy of the complaint or document that resulted in the initiation of the investigation. The department shall make the complaint and supporting documents available to the contractor. The complaint or supporting documents shall contain information regarding the specific facts that serve as the basis for the complaint. The contractor may submit a written response to the information contained in such complaint or document within 20 days after service to the contractor of the complaint or document. The contractor’s written response shall be considered by the probable cause panel. The right to respond does not prohibit the issuance of a summary emergency order if necessary to protect the public. However, if the secretary, or the secretary’s designee, and the chair of the board or the chair of the probable cause panel agree in writing that such notification would be detrimental to the investigation, the department may withhold notification. The department may conduct an investigation without notification to a contractor if the act under investigation is a criminal offense.

History.—ss. 12, 17, ch. 79-200; s. 371, ch. 81-259; ss. 2, 3, ch. 81-318; s. 7, ch. 83-160; ss. 87, 119, ch. 83-329; s. 9, ch. 87-74; ss. 14, 20, 21, ch. 88-156; s. 13, ch. 89-162; s. 34, ch. 89-374; s. 24, ch. 90-109; s. 40, ch. 90-228; s. 39, ch. 91-137; s. 4, ch. 91-429; s. 63, ch. 92-149; s. 18, ch. 93-166; s. 9, ch. 96-298; s. 73, ch. 96-388; s. 226, ch. 96-410; s. 1129, ch. 97-103; s. 12, ch. 97-228; s. 146, ch. 98-166; s. 67, ch. 98-287; s. 9, ch. 98-419; s. 27, ch. 99-254; s. 205, ch. 2000-160; s. 3, ch. 2005-227; s. 35, ch. 2009-195; s. 4, ch. 2021-124.

F.S. 489.129 on Google Scholar

F.S. 489.129 on Casetext

Amendments to 489.129

Arrestable Offenses / Crimes under Fla. Stat. 489.129

Level: Degree
Misdemeanor/Felony: First/Second/Third

Current data shows no reason an arrest or criminal charge should have occurred directly under Florida Statute 489.129.

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

10 Cases from Casetext:Date Descending

U.S. Supreme Court

11th Cir. - Ct. App.11th Cir. - MD FL11th Cir. - ND FL11th Cir. - SD FLFed. Reg.Secondary Sources - All

Bodiford v. Dep't of Bus. & Prof'l Regulation
352 So. 3d 441 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2022)
"Actual Damages" as used in Section 489.143(2), F.S., shall mean the general measure of damages suffered as a direct result of a licensee's violation of Section 489.129(1)(g), (j), (k), or 713.35, F.S., for failing to perform a construction contract. Actual Damages are calculated as the difference between the contract price, together with the change orders, and the cost of construction completion by another builder, where the cost of completion is for the same scope of work and materials set out in the original contract. However, if the claimant has paid a deposit or down payment and no actual work is performed or materials are delivered, actual damages shall not exceed the exact dollar amount of the deposit or down payment.
PAGE 446
Rodriguez v. Dep't of Bus. & Prof'l Regulation
326 So. 3d 796 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2021) Cited 1 times
On August 19, 2019, the Department filed a dual-count administrative complaint against Rodriguez, alleging violations of sections 489.129(1)(i) and 489.129(1)(j), Florida Statutes. See § 489.129(1)(i), (j), Fla. Stat. (authorizing disciplinary action "if the contractor ... is found guilty of any of the following acts: ... (i) Failing in any material respect to comply with the provisions of this part or violating a rule or lawful order of the board. (j) Abandoning a construction project in which the contractor is engaged or under contract as a contractor").
PAGE 798
Gale Force Roofing & Restoration, LLC v. Brown
548 F. Supp. 3d 1143 (N.D. Fla. 2021) Cited 2 times 2 Legal Analyses
1 more...
As discussed below, the fact that the Construction Industry Licensing Board has discretion to impose discipline for specified infractions, see § 489.129, Fla. Stat., does not negate the fact that the Secretary is tasked with investigating and prosecuting violations of relevant Florida law, including section 489.147.
PAGE 1155
Stasinos v. State
209 So. 3d 18 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016) Cited 1 times
(b) The judgment ... is based upon a violation of s. 489.129(1)(g), (j) [abandoning a construction project], or (k) or s. 713.35.
PAGE 22
Palmer v. Jones
Case No.: 5:13cv368/WS/EMT (N.D. Fla. Dec. 9, 2015)
Motion to dismiss
On cross-examination, Mr. Bishop testified that building permits for the project were obtained by an individual named Al Hancock (ECF No. 40, Ex. D at 228-30). He testified that Al Hancock is a Florida licensed general contractor (id. at 230). Mr. Bishop repeated that, for an unlicenced contractor to work under a licensed contractor, the licensed contractor must pay the unlicenced contractor and withhold employment taxes (id. at 232). He testified that he investigated Mr. Hancock's involvement in Ms. Griffin's project (id. at 233). Mr. Bishop testified that Mr. Hancock violated Florida's contracting laws by "aiding and abetting" Petitioner's contracting without a license (id. at 234). He testified that Hancock was charged with violating Florida Statutes § 489.129 (1) and (D) for performing any act which assists a person or entity in engaging in the prohibited unregistered and uncertified practice of contracting, and Hancock was fined for the violation (id.).
PAGE 22
Dept. of Business v. Harden
10 So. 3d 647 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009) Cited 5 times
(Emphasis supplied). The ALJ found that section 489.129 "clearly indicates that the final order being addressed in subsection (7) is a final order issued by the CILB." While we do not disagree that the term "final order" in section 489.129( 7) refers to a final order of the CILB, we disagree that rule 61G4-12.017 is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority, because authority for this rule may be obtained from other subsections of section 489.129( 7). Subsection (1)(h) of section 489.129 grants the Board the power to deny issuance of a certification, registration, or the grant of a certification of authority when the applicant for such has been "disciplined by any municipality or county for an act or violation of this part." This subsection authorizes the Board to consider final orders imposed by other jurisdictions which discipline an applicant, such as the final order in the instant case. Further authority for the rule in question is provided by sections 489.129( 1)(b) and 489.129( 1)(q), which respectively give the Board authority to consider whether the applicant for licensure has been convicted of or pled…
Rodriguez v. Dept. of Business
985 So. 2d 682 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008) Cited 1 times
The appellant filed an administrative complaint against Walker with the Department of Business and Professional Regulation. Walker violated the contract, thereby violating section 489.129(1)(G), (J), or (K), Florida Statutes. The Construction Industry Licensing Board revoked Walker's license and fined him. The Board also ordered Walker to pay $24,750 in restitution to Rodriguez.
PAGE 683
Gonzalez v. Dept. of Bus
958 So. 2d 494 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007) Cited 2 times
We find no merit in the Appellant's contention that that license revocation was an excessively harsh punishment. Given the circumstances of this case, license revocation was within the permissible range of penalties for a violation of section 489.129(1)(q). See Fla. Admin. Code R. 61G4-17.001(1)(q)(2005).
PAGE 495
Nicks v. Profnl
957 So. 2d 65 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007) Cited 9 times
More specifically, these facts would support the Board's findings that Nicks violated section 489.129( 1)(m) by committing incompetency or misconduct in the practice of contracting; violated section 489.129( 1)(n), Florida Statutes, by committing gross negligence, repeated negligence, or negligence resulting in a significant danger to life or property; and, violated section 489.129( 1)(j), Florida Statutes, by abandoning a construction project by terminating the project without just cause. Nicks argues that even if he waived his right to contest the factual allegations of the administrative complaint, the Department was still required to prove those facts with competent, substantial evidence before it could take action against his license. In making this argument, Nicks cites to Scoff v. Dep't of Professional Regulation, 603 So.2d 519 (Fla. 1st DCA 1992). We reject Nicks' argument. When a party waives the right to challenge the factual allegations of an administrative complaint, either by requesting an informal hearing pursuant to section 120.57(2), Florida Statutes, or by failing to respond to the complaint at all, the facts of the complaint are deemed…
Shimkus v. State, Department of Business & Professional Regulation, Construction Industry Licensing Board
932 So. 2d 223 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)
Section 489.129(1) authorizes disciplinary action (revocation or suspension of license) if the business organization for which the contractor is a primary qualifying agent (licensee) is found guilty of abandoning a construction project. Section 489.1195(1)(a) makes qualifying agents for a business organization jointly and equally responsible for supervision of all operations of the business organization including field work and financial matters.
PAGE 225
Cases from cite.case.law:
STASINOS, v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS PROFESSIONAL REGULATION,, 209 So. 3d 18 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2016)

. . . (b) The judgment ... is based upon a violation of s. 489.129(1)(g), (j) [abandoning a construction project . . .
DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD, v. M. HARDEN,, 10 So. 3d 647 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2009)

. . . In pertinent part, this statute provides: 489.129 Disciplinary proceedings.— (7) The board shall not . . . The ALJ found that section 489.129 “clearly indicates that the final order being addressed in subsection . . . While we do not disagree that the term “final order” in section 489.129(7) refers to a final order of . . . Subsection (l)(h) of section 489.129 grants the Board the power to deny issuance of a certification, . . . Further authority for the rule in question is provided by sections 489.129(l)(b) and 489.129(l)(q), which . . .
RODRIGUEZ, v. DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD,, 985 So. 2d 682 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2008)

. . . Walker violated the contract, thereby violating section 489.129(1)(G), (J), or (K), Florida Statutes. . . .
R. GONZALEZ, v. DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION,, 958 So. 2d 494 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . Licensing Board (“Board”) filed an administrative complaint against the Appellant, pursuant to section 489.129 . . . At the hearing, the prosecutor presented evidence that the Appellant had four prior section 489.129 violations . . . Here, the Appellant was charged with violating section 489.129(l)(q), which authorizes the Board to revoke . . . this case, license revocation was within the permissible range of penalties for a violation of section 489.129 . . .
NICKS, v. DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL, ETC., 957 So. 2d 65 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2007)

. . . on its finding of waiver, the Board also found that Nicks had violated various provisions of section 489.129 . . . More specifically, these facts would support the Board's findings that Nicks violated section 489.129 . . . (l)(m) by committing incompetency or misconduct in the practice of contracting; violated section 489.129 . . . negligence, or negligence resulting in a significant danger to life or property; and, violated section 489.129 . . . Section 489.129(1), Florida Statutes, provides that the Board may take disciplinary action, including . . .
E. SHIMKUS, v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD,, 932 So. 2d 223 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . a final order directing the licensee to pay restitution to the claimant based on a violation of s. 489.129 . . . Section 489.129(1) authorizes disciplinary action (revocation or suspension of license) if the business . . . who obtain judgments in circumstances where the activities of the qualifying agent violate section 489.129 . . .
F. MIDGETT, v. DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD,, 902 So. 2d 355 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2005)

. . . The five-count complaint alleged that Mid-gett violated sections 489.129(l)(g)(2), (l)(j), (l)(m), and . . .
F. LAPP, v. DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION,, 874 So. 2d 671 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2004)

. . . substantial, competent evidence to find that Lapp violated either section 455.227(l)(j) or section 489.129 . . .
MICHNAL, v. PALM COAST DEVELOPMENT, INC., 842 So. 2d 927 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2003)

. . . See § 489.129(1)®, Fla. Stat. (1997). . . . See 489.129(1)(e), Fla. Stat. (1997). . . .
McNULTY, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION,, 814 So. 2d 527 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . the Construction Licensing Board requiring him to satisfy a judgment against him pursuant to section 489.129 . . . Section 489.129(l)(r) only requires proof that appellant, as a licensee or a qualified licensee for a . . .
CAMEJO, v. DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION,, 812 So. 2d 583 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2002)

. . . disciplinary proceeding, and his argument on appeal, is that he cannot be held accountable pursuant to section 489.129 . . . Section 489.129 does not carve out an exception for qualifying agents who fail to maintain control over . . .
A. MARCELIN, v. STATE DEPARTMENT BUSINESS PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD,, 753 So. 2d 745 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . See § 489.129(l)(c), (e), (f), Fla. Stat. (Supp.1992). . . .
JONAS, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION,, 746 So. 2d 1261 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 2000)

. . . Florida Construction Industry Licensing Board (Board), which found him guilty of violating section 489.129 . . . Accordingly, we affirm the final order which found him guilty of violating section 489.129(1)(n) and . . . Section 489.129(1) specifically authorizes the Board to “require financial restitution to a consumer” . . . The Department emphasizes that section 489.129(1)(r) of the applicable practice act does not require . . . the Board does not have the authority to require “restitution” to non-consumers pursuant to section 489.129 . . .
LOEFFLER, v. FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION,, 739 So. 2d 150 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . First, Loeffler was charged with violating section 489.129(l)(g) by engaging in the business of contracting . . . Second, he was charged with violating section 489.129(1)© by failing to otherwise comply with the provisions . . . Finally, in count III Loeffler was charged with violating section 489.129(l)(r) “by failing to satisfy . . . Accordingly, Petitioner has failed to demonstrate that Respondent violated the provisions of Section 489.129 . . . decide otherwise would enable the Respondent to take advantage of (i.e., avoid culpability under § 489.129 . . .
A. FREE J. A. F. v. CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRIES RECOVERY FUND J., 729 So. 2d 980 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1999)

. . . that the judgment obtained by Walsh against J.A.F. was based on a demonstrated violation of section 489.129 . . . The Board argues that the following language in section 489.129(l)(h)3., describing “financial mismanagement . . .
STATE v. B. BOWLING,, 712 So. 2d 798 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . Bowling’s state registration pursuant to section 489.129(l)(k), Florida Statutes (1993). . . . conclude, for several reasons,' that the legislature intended to impose civil penalties in section 489.129 . . . Third, section 489.129 creates a “disciplinary proceeding” rather than a criminal proceeding. . . . Thus, the legislature has clearly implied a preference to label the penalties in section 489.129 as civil . . . Similarly, the $5,000 fine does not render section 489.129 criminal. . . .
B. LEWIS, v. STATE DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD,, 711 So. 2d 573 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1998)

. . . Section 489.129(1)(r), Florida Statutes (Supp.1996), provides in pertinent part that revocation of a . . .
MOLINARI, v. DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS PROFESSIONAL REGULATION,, 688 So. 2d 388 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1997)

. . . license, the Department of Business and Professional Regulation charged him with violating section 489.129 . . . Section 489.129(l)(b), governing this proceeding, did not contain a similar provision in 1990, although . . .
MURTHY, v. N. SINHA CORP., 644 So. 2d 983 (Fla. 1994)

. . . however, affirmed the dismissal of the remaining claims because it determined that sections 489.119 and 489.129 . . .
MURTHY, v. N. SINHA CORP., 618 So. 2d 307 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1993)

. . . However, this court has determined that neither sections 489.119 nor 489.129, the regulatory and penal . . .
A. FINKLE, v. MAYERCHAK,, 578 So. 2d 396 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1991)

. . . We agree with the trial court that neither sections 489.119 nor 489.129, Florida Statutes (1989), regulatory . . .
A. O CONNOR, v. DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD,, 566 So. 2d 549 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . .-129(l)(d) and 489.129(l)(m), Florida Statutes (1987). . . . These statutory provisions of section 489.129 authorize the Board to impose an appropriate disciplinary . . . Section 489.129(l)(m) does not define gross negligence. . . . . § 489.129(3), Fla.Stat. (1987). . . . Since section 489.129 allows the technician’s building code violations to be imputed to Mr. . . .
C. BONESKI, v. DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION,, 562 So. 2d 441 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1990)

. . . At the time of the initiation of this administrative action, the following provision of section 489.129 . . . (1), Florida Statutes (1987), controlled: 489.129 Disciplinary proceedings.— (1) The board may revoke . . . More importantly, the following 1988 amendment to section 489.129 cannot be applied retroactively: (1 . . .
L. MONTGOMERY E. v. CHAMBERLAIN, 543 So. 2d 234 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1989)

. . . We note that section 489.129(l)(f), Florida Statutes (1987), states that a license holder may be subject . . .
DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, v. NORRIS, 24 Fla. Supp. 2d 269 (Fla. Div. Admin. Hearings 1986)

. . . Norris as a certified general contractor should be disciplined for violation of: 1) Section 489.129(l . . . Statutes, (1983), by aiding an unlicensed person to evade the requirements of Chapter 489; 2) Section 489.129 . . . Florida Statutes (1983), by failing to qualify a firm through which Respondent was acting; 4) Section 489.129 . . . hearing, the Department amended the Administrative Complaint to dismiss the violations of Sections 489.129 . . . Section 489.129(l)(f) prohibits a licensed contractor from knowingly combining or conspiring with an . . .
BLUME, v. DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD,, 489 So. 2d 880 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1986)

. . . Section 489.129(1) authorizes the Construction Industry Licensing Board (the Board) to impose sanctions . . . The Board found the appellant (Blume) guilty of the conduct proscribed in section 489.129(l)(e) and reprimanded . . . of Professional Regulation (the Department) alleging that Blume had violated, among others, section 489.129 . . . that Blume’s failure to verify whether Hahn had a license did not constitute a violation of section 489.129 . . . s exception to the hearing officer’s recommended report and found Blume guilty of violating section 489.129 . . .
DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD, v. S. PARISER, C., 483 So. 2d 28 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1985)

. . . The specific authority cited for Rule 21E-12.08 as amended 12-19-82 is Section 455.227(2) and 489.129 . . . The hearing officer concluded that Section 489.129(3) authorizes the Board to specify by rule what acts . . . or omissions constitute violation of Section 489.129(1), which authorizes imposition of a $5,000.00 . . . discipline for ‘failure in any material respect to comply with the provisions of this act’ however, Section 489.129 . . . Section 489.129(l)(e), (j), (m) & (3) provides: The board may revoke, suspend, or deny the issuance or . . . I simply cannot agree with the hearing officer’s conclusion that “[sjection 489.129(1) ... does not specify . . . deny the issuance of a contractor’s certificate is a power specifically delegated to it by section 489.129 . . . Thus, upon reading sections 455.227(2) and 489.129(1) in pari materia, I would find that the board has . . .
PARISER v. DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION FOWLER v. DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, 10 Fla. Supp. 2d 177 (Fla. Div. Admin. Hearings 1985)

. . . Rule 21E-12.08, Florida Administrative Code, cites as authority therefor Sections 455.227(2) and 489.129 . . . Section 489.129(1), Florida Statutes, authorizes the Board to impose an administrative fine not to exceed . . . Section 489.129(3), Florida Statutes, authorizes the Board to specify by rule the acts or omissions which . . . However, Section 489.129(1), Florida Statutes, does not specify that an administrative fine must be paid . . .
K. GODWIN, v. DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION,, 461 So. 2d 226 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . .-127(l)(d), Florida Statutes, and thereby Section 489.129(l)(j), Florida Statutes. . . . Section 489.129(l)(j) allows the Board to revoke a contractor’s license for “failure in any material . . . violation of Section 489.127(l)(d) is not a material failure to comply within the meaning of Section 489.129 . . . determination that such activity amounts to a violation of Section 489.127(l)(d) and thereby Section 489.129 . . .
HUNTER, v. DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION,, 458 So. 2d 842 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . that Hunter abandoned the Williams project because the corporation went out of business and section 489.129 . . . diverted funds from either project or abandoned the Williams project within the meaning of section 489.129 . . . SCHOONOVER and LEHAN, JJ., concur. . 489.129 Disciplinary proceedings.— (1) The board may revoke, suspend . . .
KINAST, v. DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REGULATION,, 458 So. 2d 1159 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1984)

. . . against Kinast were commenced by a twelve-count administrative complaint alleging various violations of § 489.129 . . .
STATE v. BUBSEY, 427 So. 2d 358 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1983)

. . . Section 489.129, Florida Statutes (1979) enumerates the powers and duties of the State Construction Industry . . .
In H. CLAYTON H. J. CRONIN J. v. CLAYTON,, 9 B.R. 5 (Bankr. S.D. Fla. 1980)

. . . In re Romero, 10 Cir. 1976, 535 F.2d 618, 621, so holds and the Florida statute (§ 489.129) is indistinguishable . . .

The 2023 Florida Statutes (including Special Session C)

Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

10 Cases from Casetext:Date Descending

Cases from cite.case.law: