Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

You're probably overthinking it. Call a lawyer.

Call Now: 904-383-7448
Florida Statute 550.1815 - Full Text and Legal Analysis
Florida Statute 550.1815 | Lawyer Caselaw & Research
Link to State of Florida Official Statute
F.S. 550.1815 Case Law from Google Scholar Google Search for Amendments to 550.1815

The 2025 Florida Statutes

Title XXXIII
REGULATION OF TRADE, COMMERCE, INVESTMENTS, AND SOLICITATIONS
Chapter 550
PARI-MUTUEL WAGERING
View Entire Chapter
550.1815 Certain persons prohibited from holding racing or jai alai permits; suspension and revocation.
(1) A corporation, general or limited partnership, sole proprietorship, business trust, joint venture, or unincorporated association, or other business entity may not hold any horseracing or greyhound permit or jai alai fronton permit in this state if any one of the persons or entities specified in paragraph (a) has been determined by the commission not to be of good moral character or has been convicted of any offense specified in paragraph (b).
(a)1. The permitholder;
2. An employee of the permitholder;
3. The sole proprietor of the permitholder;
4. A corporate officer or director of the permitholder;
5. A general partner of the permitholder;
6. A trustee of the permitholder;
7. A member of an unincorporated association permitholder;
8. A joint venturer of the permitholder;
9. The owner of more than 5 percent of any equity interest in the permitholder, whether as a common shareholder, general or limited partner, voting trustee, or trust beneficiary; or
10. An owner of any interest in the permit or permitholder, including any immediate family member of the owner, or holder of any debt, mortgage, contract, or concession from the permitholder, who by virtue thereof is able to control the business of the permitholder.
(b)1. A felony in this state;
2. Any felony in any other state which would be a felony if committed in this state under the laws of this state;
3. Any felony under the laws of the United States;
4. A felony under the laws of another state if related to gambling which would be a felony under the laws of this state if committed in this state; or
5. Bookmaking as defined in s. 849.25.
(2)(a) If the applicant for permit as specified under subsection (1) or a permitholder as specified in paragraph (1)(a) has received a full pardon or a restoration of civil rights with respect to the conviction specified in paragraph (1)(b), the conviction does not constitute an absolute bar to the issuance or renewal of a permit or a ground for the revocation or suspension of a permit.
(b) A corporation that has been convicted of a felony is entitled to apply for and receive a restoration of its civil rights in the same manner and on the same grounds as an individual.
(3) After notice and hearing, the commission shall refuse to issue or renew or shall suspend, as appropriate, any permit found in violation of subsection (1). The order shall become effective 120 days after service of the order upon the permitholder and shall be amended to constitute a final order of revocation unless the permitholder has, within that period of time, either caused the divestiture, or agreed with the convicted person upon a complete immediate divestiture, of her or his holding, or has petitioned the circuit court as provided in subsection (4) or, in the case of corporate officers or directors of the holder or employees of the holder, has terminated the relationship between the permitholder and those persons mentioned. The commission may, by order, extend the 120-day period for divestiture, upon good cause shown, to avoid interruption of any jai alai or race meeting or to otherwise effectuate this section. If no action has been taken by the permitholder within the 120-day period following the issuance of the order of suspension, the commission shall, without further notice or hearing, enter a final order of revocation of the permit. When any permitholder or sole proprietor of a permitholder is convicted of an offense specified in paragraph (1)(b), the commission may approve a transfer of the permit to a qualified applicant, upon a finding that revocation of the permit would impair the state’s revenue from the operation of the permit or otherwise be detrimental to the interests of the state in the regulation of the industry of pari-mutuel wagering. In such approval, no public referendum is required, notwithstanding any other provision of law. A petition for transfer after conviction must be filed with the commission within 30 days after service upon the permitholder of the final order of revocation. The timely filing of such a petition automatically stays any revocation order until further order of the commission.
(4) The circuit courts have jurisdiction to decide a petition brought by a holder of a pari-mutuel permit that shows that its permit is in jeopardy of suspension or revocation under subsection (3) and that it is unable to agree upon the terms of divestiture of interest with the person specified in subparagraphs (1)(a)3.-9. who has been convicted of an offense specified in paragraph (1)(b). The court shall determine the reasonable value of the interest of the convicted person and order a divestiture upon such terms and conditions as it finds just. In determining the value of the interest of the convicted person, the court may consider, among other matters, the value of the assets of the permitholder, its good will and value as a going concern, recent and expected future earnings, and other criteria usual and customary in the sale of like enterprises.
(5) The commission shall make such rules for the photographing, fingerprinting, and obtaining of personal data of individuals described in paragraph (1)(a) and the obtaining of such data regarding the business entities described in paragraph (1)(a) as is necessary to effectuate the provisions of this section.
History.s. 24, ch. 92-348; s. 29, ch. 97-98; s. 788, ch. 97-103; s. 17, ch. 2021-271; s. 25, ch. 2022-7.

F.S. 550.1815 on Google Scholar

F.S. 550.1815 on CourtListener

Amendments to 550.1815


Annotations, Discussions, Cases:

Cases Citing Statute 550.1815

Total Results: 2  |  Sort by: Relevance  |  Newest First

Copy

Jacques v. Dep't of Bus. & Prof'l Reg., Div. of Pari-Mutuel Wagering, 15 So. 3d 793 (Fla. 1st DCA 2009).

Cited 4 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2009 Fla. App. LEXIS 9838, 2009 WL 2151905

...We find additional support for the Division's interpretation from an examination of the entire legislative scheme. A slot machine licensee must maintain a pari-mutuel permit pursuant to the provisions of chapter 550. § 551.104(4)(b), Fla. Stat. (2007). Section 550.1815(1)(b)1, Florida Statutes (2007), precludes any business entity *797 from holding a pari-mutuel permit if an owner, partner, corporate officer or director, or employee has been convicted of "[a] felony in this state." See Yeoman v. Constr. Indus. Licensing Bd., 919 So.2d 542, 544 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005) (noting that section 550.1815(1)(b)1 provides an absolute bar to licensure where the applicant has a prior felony conviction)....
...Otherwise, if appellants' reading of the statute is correct, an employee of a slot machine licensee with a non-enumerated Florida felony conviction could receive a slot machine occupational license under section 551.107(2)(a)1, but the slot machine licensee would become ineligible for a pari-mutuel permit under section 550.1815(1)(b)1 and, as a consequence, would forfeit its slot machine license....
...Finally, any error in characterizing the ultimate determination that appellants were disqualified from licensure as a finding of fact rather than a conclusion of law was harmless. AFFIRMED. BARFIELD and PADOVANO, JJ., concur. NOTES [*] The parties agree that section 550.1815 has no role in the denial of the slot machine occupational licenses in this case because appellants are not employees of a slot machine licensee/pari-mutuel permit holder; rather, they are in the business of designing and providing custom signage related to slot machine gaming to slot machine licensees....
Copy

Yeoman v. CILB, 919 So. 2d 542 (Fla. 1st DCA 2005).

Cited 1 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2005 WL 3487856

...Yeoman notes that in enacting regulatory practice acts for various occupations, trades, vocations, and professions, the Legislature sometimes has set out absolute bars to licensure where the applicant has a prior felony conviction. See, e.g., § 320.27(9)(a)2., Fla. Stat. (2004) (motor vehicle dealers); § 550.1815(1)(b)1., Fla....

This Florida statute resource is curated by Graham W. Syfert, Esq., a Jacksonville, Florida personal injury and workers' compensation attorney. For legal consultation, call 904-383-7448.