Forum Selection in Administrative Appeals and the Home Venue Privilege

Sometimes, lawyers have to decide which court to appeal a case to, especially when dealing with administrative agencies like the St. Johns River Water Management District and the Southwest Florida Water Management District. In 2018, three appeals were filed in the Fifth District against the Florida Housing Finance Corporation, even though the agency is based in Leon County. This was because the decisions being reviewed related to projects located within the Fifth District, and the appellants also had their main office in the Fifth District. The U.S. Treasury gives money to Florida to help build affordable housing. The Florida Housing Finance Corporation (FHFC) decides which projects get funding. Sometimes, when there are ties between applicants, a lottery is used to decide which project gets funding. Three applicants who didn’t win appealed to the Fifth District Court of Appeals. The FHFC wanted the cases moved to the First District, but the appellants disagreed. They said the FHFC doesn’t have the right to change the court for the appeal. The outcome of the cases will determine if the appeals stay in the Fifth District or move to the First District. In Florida, when appealing an administrative decision, the choice of the court to file the appeal is determined by the state constitution and laws. The court must be in the district where the agency is located or where the party appealing lives. This is a statutory right, not a common law privilege. The “home venue privilege,” which allows cases to be heard in the district where the agency is located, used to be important for judicial efficiency, but it’s not as relevant now because of changes in the court system. The legislature has provided options for selecting the appellate court, and there are exceptions for some agencies. This means that the “home venue privilege” doesn’t automatically apply to appeals like it used to in the past. The Florida Housing Finance Corporation (FHFC) is arguing that appellate court cases should be heard in the district where the original lawsuit started. They say it’s to keep things organized and save money, but it might not be the best way to handle the cases. They also mention a legal rule about “supplementary proceedings,” but it doesn’t really apply to this situation. The legal firm used a previous case, Pelican Bay Foundation, Inc. v. Florida Fish and Wildlife Conservation Commission, as a basis to argue for a transfer of venue in their current case. However, the previous case’s transfer was an exception and not a precedent, and there was no written explanation for the transfer. The legal firm argued that the current case’s venue should also be transferred to the First District because it could have statewide implications. In simple terms, the Fifth District court ordered the appellants to explain why their cases should not be transferred. The court later denied the request to move the cases to a different venue without giving a reason. Overall, it seems that the general consensus is that the rule giving preference to the appellant’s home venue does not apply at the appellate level, except for a rare case. This means that the appellant can choose where to have their case reviewed on appeal, either where they live or where the agency involved is based, unless there’s a specific law saying otherwise.

Source: https://www.floridabar.org/the-florida-bar-journal/forum-selection-in-administrative-appeals-and-the-home-venue-privilege/