Narrative Opinion Summary
This case involves Calder Race Course, Inc.'s appeal against the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering, following the denial of its request for a formal administrative hearing. The dispute centers on the application of Florida Statutes § 550.3551(6), which limits simulcasting to 20% to protect live pari-mutuel wagering. Calder sought permission for full-card simulcasting, which was declined by the Division pending legislative review. Calder's petition for a formal hearing was also denied. The court found that the Division's non-action constituted an agency action impacting Calder's substantial interests and determined that Calder was entitled to an administrative hearing. The denial was reversed, and the case was remanded for a formal hearing to ensure a proper record and informed decision-making. While the court appreciated the Division's good faith in interpreting the statute, it denied Calder's request for attorney's fees and costs. The outcome directs the Division to hold a formal hearing, emphasizing the need for a comprehensive review process.
Legal Issues Addressed
Agency Action and Reviewsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court found that the Division's inaction on Calder's request constituted an agency action that required review, as it failed to consider the best interests of racing and the promotion of live racing.
Reasoning: The court found that the Division's refusal to consider Calder's request constituted agency action, as it failed to assess the best interests of racing and the promotion of live racing.
Denial of Attorney's Fees and Costssubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court denied Calder's request for attorney's fees and costs, recognizing the Division's good faith in its statutory interpretation.
Reasoning: The court acknowledged the Division's good faith in interpreting the statute and denied Calder’s request for attorney's fees and costs.
Right to Administrative Hearingsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: The court held that Calder Race Course, Inc. was entitled to a formal administrative hearing because its substantial interests were affected by the Division's decision not to lift the statutory limitation on simulcasting.
Reasoning: Consequently, the court determined that Calder had a right to an administrative hearing due to the substantial interests affected by the Division's decision.
Statutory Interpretation and Legislative Intentsubscribe to see similar legal issues
Application: Despite acknowledging the Division’s interpretation of the statutory limitation, the court mandated legislative review, emphasizing the need for a formal record to ensure informed decision-making.
Reasoning: The Division responded that it would not lift the limitation until the Legislature reviewed the issue further.