Sowell v. State
136 So. 3d 1285
| Fla. Dist. Ct. App. | 2014Background
- Bay County Property Appraiser petitions for a writ of mandamus to force DOR to file a probable cause review as a final order under section 120.52(7).
- DOR conducted a probable cause review and found no consistent and continuous violation by the Bay County VAB.
- DOR concluded the Bay County Property Appraiser is not authorized to file suit under section 194.036(l)(c).
- An appeal was filed within 30 days but dismissed for lack of jurisdiction because no final order had been filed with the clerk.
- DOR refused to file the probable cause review with the agency clerk, creating no final order under Rule 9.020(i).
- The court grants mandamus to require DOR to file the probable cause review with the agency clerk within 30 days.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether petitioner is entitled to mandamus to compel filing of the probable cause review | Property Appraiser argues he is adversely affected by final agency action and may seek judicial review. | DOR contends no final order exists because it has not been filed with the clerk, so no review is available. | Yes; mandamus granted to require filing within 30 days. |
Key Cases Cited
- Sowell v. Florida Dept. of Revenue, 122 So.3d 996 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (lack of jurisdiction when no final order)
- Hill v. Div. of Ret., 687 So.2d 1376 (Fla. 1st DCA 1997) (final agency action concept under review statutes)
- O'Donnell's Corp. v. Ambroise, 858 So.2d 1138 (Fla. 5th DCA 2003) (final agency action in similar context)
- Prime Orlando Props., Inc. v. Dept. of Bus. Regulation, Div. of Land Sales, Condominiums and Mobile Homes, 502 So.2d 456 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986) (test for final vs. interlocutory order)
- Huffman v. State, 813 So.2d 10 (Fla. 2000) (mandamus relief standards)