The Florida Administrative Procedure Act (APA) has rules for requesting administrative hearings, and some courts have suggested that these rules should be changed. The APA was originally meant to make it easier for citizens to access government agencies and proceedings. It allows anyone with a stake in an agency decision to request a hearing. The courts have made it easy for people to request hearings and have not allowed agencies to say someone waived their right to a hearing unless the agency clearly told them how to request one. Also, the courts have used excuses like forgetfulness or fairness to decide that someone requested a hearing on time. In 1998, the APA was amended to make it easier for people to challenge agency decisions, but also to prevent unnecessary delays in getting permits approved. The changes required anyone filing a challenge to include specific information in their petition, like how they are affected by the decision and what they want the agency to do. These changes were meant to speed up the process while still giving people a fair chance to voice their concerns. In 1998, there were significant changes to the rules for filing a petition or request for a hearing with an agency. They now have to include specific items required by the uniform rules, and the agency has to review the petition carefully to make sure it has all the necessary information. If it doesn’t, or if it’s filed late, it can be dismissed. The courts have recently paid a lot of attention to these changes, especially in cases where petitions were dismissed because they were filed late. Before 1998, a late petition could be granted if the filer had a good reason for being late, but now it has to be dismissed. For example, in a case called Cann v. Department of Children and Family Services, the court said a family wasn’t allowed a hearing because their petition was one day late. In some cases, if someone misses a deadline to request a hearing about a legal issue, they might still be allowed to have their case heard if they have a good reason for being late. This is called “equitable tolling.” The courts have said that missing the deadline for a hearing isn’t a serious problem, and they might allow for more time if there’s a good reason for being late. However, they have also said that not just any reason will do, and the facts have to be pretty special for this to be allowed. This rule might change in the future, but for now, that’s how things work. In 1998, changes were made to the APA that require agencies to dismiss petitions for hearing if they don’t meet the requirements. In recent cases, courts have upheld dismissals of hearing requests that didn’t have enough information. A judge suggested that the law should be changed, especially when complaints are filed by the agency. A report in 2004 asked the legislature to consider allowing excusable neglect in administrative proceedings again, but no action was taken. In 1998, the APA was amended to make sure that petitions for hearings meet certain legal requirements and deadlines. The goal was to keep the process fair and avoid unnecessary delays. Some courts say that the rules should be strictly followed, while others think there should be exceptions for good reasons. So far, the rules have not changed, but it might happen in the future. The Florida Administrative Procedure Act, or APA, is a set of rules for how the government and its agencies make decisions. It was updated in 1999 to make it easier for citizens to challenge the government’s decisions. The APA also gives people the right to ask for a hearing if they feel their interests are being affected by a government decision. The law was changed again in 2003 to make it clearer what needs to be included in a request for a hearing. The Division of Administrative Hearings issues an annual report with recommendations for changes to the APA.
Source: https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/excuse-me-the-courts-suggest-the-legislature-amend-apa-provisions-governing-requests-for-hearing/
Leave a Reply