CopyCited 14 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2193, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10184
...for periods of five to ten years covering the sites of the seven permitted signs. In October 1984 DOT reviewed the sites and zoning ordinances, and sent notices of violation to Tri-State advising that the permits were going to be revoked pursuant to section 479.08, Florida Statutes (1983), because the locations had not been zoned commercial or industrial as stated in Henderson's original applications....
...d commercial or industrial as represented in the applications. Accordingly, the hearing officer concluded that the applications submitted by Henderson contained "false or misleading statements" and recommended that the permits be revoked pursuant to section 479.08....
...Finally, we do not agree with DOT's argument that an application shown to contain false and misleading statements, per se, renders the permit issued thereon void ab initio. Such permit is only voidable because it necessarily remains valid and effective until lawfully revoked upon a proper showing by DOT under section 479.08. Section 479.08 explicitly requires that the challenged application contain "knowingly false or misleading information." We construe the inclusion of the word "knowingly in the statute as an expression of legislative intent to exclude from its ambit a...
...Rather, I view it as a determination that as a finder of fact the hearing officer was not persuaded by the evidence of the facts sought to be proven. Nevertheless, even if it were error to reject that testimony, the final order should be affirmed. Section 479.08, Florida Statutes 1985, authorizes the Florida Department of Transportation to revoke a sign permit "when the application for the permit contains knowingly false or misleading information." The hearing officer found as a conclusion of...
CopyCited 12 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1979 Fla. App. LEXIS 14026
...ortation reserves the right to take such action as the law permits including by but not limited to the removal of the sign(s) in violation without further notice. " (emphasis supplied) This printed portion of the notice complies with Florida Statute §
479.08, Revocation of permits and Florida Statute §
120.60(5)....
...t. Sections
479.10, .17, Florida Statutes (1977). Revocation, on the other hand, required a 30-day opportunity to cure any formal Department adjudicatory action upon the permit, for the review of which the permittee was granted circuit court review. Section
479.08, Florida Statutes (1977)....
...86): On or before November 1 of each year the department shall prepare and send to each licensee a renewal notice of fees due for the coming year. All licenses expire on the last day of December for the year issued. Fees for licenses which are allowed to become delinquent will not be accepted. [8] Section 479.08, entitled "Revocation of permit," provides: (1) The department may after 30 days' notice in writing to the permittee, revoke any permit issued by it under s....
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1991 WL 115168
...By letter dated March 17, 1989, DOT advised Dolphin that its permits were not valid as they had been issued in error. Dolphin requested and received a section
120.57(1) hearing. At the hearing, DOT argued that it had the authority to revoke the permits under section
479.08, Florida Statutes, which provides that the department may revoke any permit granted under Chapter 479 when it is determined that the application for the permit contained "knowingly false or misleading information......
...Because no sign had yet been placed at the conflicting site, Dolphin had no knowledge that the conflict in fact existed, and so Dolphin could not have "knowingly and falsely" alleged on its application that the nearest sign was 1600 feet away. Therefore, DOT's reliance on section 479.08 was misplaced....
CopyCited 6 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 938, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 7378
...April 22, 1986. W. Kirk Brown, Tallahassee, for appellant. Maxine F. Ferguson, Tallahassee, for appellee. *564 MILLS, Judge. Jack M. Wainwright appeals from the revocation by the Department of Transportation (DOT) of his outdoor advertising permits, pursuant to Section 479.08, Florida Statutes (1984 Supp.)....
...must be strictly construed. Federgo Discount Center v. Dept. of Professional Regulation, Board of Pharmacy,
452 So.2d 1063, 1066 (Fla. 3d DCA 1984); Rush v. DPR, Board of Podiatry,
448 So.2d 26, 27 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). Here, the authorizing statute, Section
479.08, gives DOT the authority to revoke any permit granted under the chapter "in any case in which it determines that the application for the permit contains knowingly false or misleading information or that the permittee has violated any o...
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 2204
...d was zoned agricultural, the hearing officer recommended that the signs be removed. He also recommended that two of the sign permits be revoked, but as to the third one, he found that the notice of violation had not charged appellant with violating section 479.08 (which authorizes revocation of permits), and neither had DOT issued its customary notice of intent to revoke a permit....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2002 Fla. App. LEXIS 15490, 2002 WL 31373490
...oncluded that appellant's billboard was not located on the premises of a business and, therefore, required a sign permit pursuant to section
479.07, Florida Statutes (2001). Appellant also argues for the first time on appeal that sections
479.07 and
479.08, Florida Statutes (2001), as well as Florida Administrative Code Rules 14-10.004 and 14-10.006, impose a facially unconstitutional prior restraint on speech in violation of the First Amendment of the United States Constitution. We affirm the agency's Final Order without further discussion. For the reasons discussed below, we hold that sections
479.07 and
479.08 and rules 14-10.004 and 14-10.006 do not impose an impermissible prior restraint on speech....
...ment to the on-premises exemption. In its Final Order, the agency adopted the Administrative Law Judge's Recommended Order and directed appellant to remove the outdoor advertising sign. This appeal followed. Appellant argues that sections
479.07 and
479.08 and rules 14-10.004 and 14-10.006 impose a facially unconstitutional prior restraint on speech....
...l objective permitting criteria. In addition to the statutory requirements, an applicant must comply with the size, number of faces, location, spacing, structure height, and lighting requirements set forth in the rule. Fla. Admin. Code R. 14-10.006. Section 479.08 authorizes the Department of Transportation to: deny or revoke any permit requested or granted under this chapter in any case in which it determines that the application for the permit contains knowingly false or misleading information...
...approval of public officials. See Nightclubs, Inc. v. City of Paducah,
202 F.3d 884, 889 (6th Cir.2000) (citing Southeastern Promotions, Ltd. v. Conrad,
420 U.S. 546,
95 S.Ct. 1239,
43 L.Ed.2d 448 (1975)). Under this definition, sections
479.07 and
479.08 and rules 14-10.004 and 14-10.006 do constitute a prior restraint on speech in the outdoor advertising sign domain....
...Cannabis Action Network, Inc. v. City of Jacksonville,
130 F.Supp.2d 1358 (M.D.Fla.2001) (stating that ordinance requiring permit for festival was content-based and, therefore, subject to prior restraint analysis). Here, although sections
479.07 and
479.08 and rules 14-10.004 and 14-1.006 are prior restraints on the erection of outdoor advertising signs, the regulations are not impermissible prior restraints on speech....
...Because the regulations are not broader than necessary, they meet the final Central Hudson criterion. Therefore, the permitting regulations meet the constitutional requirements of Central Hudson to the extent that they regulate commercial speech. Thus, we hold that sections
479.07 and
479.08 and rules 14-10.004 and 14-10.006 do not impose an impermissible prior restraint on speech nor do these regulations improperly restrict commercial speech. Accordingly, sections
479.07 and
479.08 and rules 14-10.004 and 14-10.006 are facially constitutional....
...00. [2] Because appellant's sign does not convey any noncommercial advertising and because appellant does not argue that the regulations improperly affect noncommercial speech, this Court need not address the constitutionality of sections
479.07 and
479.08 as they pertain to noncommercial speech.
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1654, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9028
...Ferguson and Franz Dorn, Tallahassee, for appellee. WILLIS, BEN C. (Ret.), Associate Judge. In each of the above-styled cases, Food `n Fun appeals from a final order of the Department of Transportation revoking outdoor advertising permits pursuant to Section 479.08, Florida Statutes (1984 Supp.)....
...progress, such as a business sign, employees at work, cars in a parking lot, etc. With regard to the welding and dairy supply business, there was also evidence that those businesses were no longer in operation at the time of the hearing. Pursuant to Section 479.08(1), Florida Statutes, "the department may ......
...ause not clearly within the ambit of its statutory authority, as statutes authorizing revocation must be strictly construed. Rush v. Department of Professional Regulation,
448 So.2d 26 (Fla. 1st DCA 1984). In this case, DOT relies on that portion of Section
479.08 which authorizes revocation based on violation of Chapter 479 by the permittee, in this case by placing signs in what DOT later determined to be a non-commercial zone....
...years preceding these hearings. It cannot be said that, when that interpretation changes so as to render a previously lawful sign nonconforming, the permittee has committed a violation of the chapter so as to support revocation of his permits under Section 479.08....
CopyCited 4 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1469, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 8655
...has now determined that the permits were improperly issued. This testimony indicated that appellant's applications contained false or misleading statements, and that there was no bona fide commercial activity in the area at the time of application. Section 479.08, Florida Statutes, authorizes DOT to revoke a permit when "the application for the permit contains knowingly false or misleading information......
...the present case DOT corrected an erroneous factual determination, predicated upon the applicant's misrepresentation, in accordance with continuing consistent statutory construction. Appellant's permits are properly subject to revocation pursuant to section 479.08, insofar as the permit applications contained knowingly false or misleading information....
CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2279
...of Transp., for appellee in Nos. BL-377 and BL-438. ERVIN, Judge. In each of the above-styled cases T & L Management, Inc. (T & L), appeals from a final order of the Florida Department of Transportation, revoking outdoor advertising permits pursuant to Section 479.08, Florida Statutes (Supp....
...ight-of-way, except within zoned or unzoned commercial areas. Florida Administrative Code Rule 14-10.09(2), Section I.1.B., limits unzoned commercial or industrial areas to "within eight hundred (800) feet of such commercial or industrial activity." Section 479.08, Florida Statutes (Supp....
...ders, subsequently adopted by the department in its final orders, stating that the permits violated certain provisions of Chapter 479 at the time of their issuance. The permits were thus revocable pursuant to the authority given to the department in section 479.08....
...at the businesses which provided the basis for approval of the permits issued by the department did not in fact exist when the permits were issued. Thus, the permits never complied with the requirements of Chapter 479, and were revocable pursuant to section 479.08....
...ida Statutes." Implicit in this finding of fact and in the record of this case is the conclusion that the permit application contained knowingly false and misleading statements. The permit in BL-235 was accordingly revocable pursuant to section *687 479.08 as containing false and misleading statements....
...the residential use of the structure and the evidence is equally ambiguous." Id. In the instant cases, the record and the orders are clear that the structures were primarily residential in nature, and the permits were therefore revocable pursuant to section 479.08....
...act that the business which provided the basis for the department's approval of the permits was located more than 800 feet from the closest possible location where the sign could be constructed. Therefore, the sign permits were revocable pursuant to section 479.08....
...In all of the above cases the appellant argues that the department may not revoke permits because the permits were not issued illegally, but rather the department had merely changed its policy. We acknowledge that a mere change in policy does not provide DOT with the authority to revoke a permit pursuant to section 479.08....
...Department of Transportation,
488 So.2d 563 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). In the instant cases, however, where permits are issued in clear violation of the unambiguous language of Chapter 479 and Florida Administrative Code Rule 14-10.09, DOT clearly has the authority, pursuant to section
479.08, to revoke permits previously issued....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 8774, 2001 WL 708801
...uirements of Agrico Chemical Company v. Department of Environmental Regulation,
406 So.2d 478 (Fla. 2d DCA 1981). Because we hold that the third-party standing requirements of Agrico are not applicable, and Maverick has standing pursuant to sections
479.08 and
120.52(12)(a), Florida Statutes (1999), to challenge DOT's denial of Maverick's sign permit, we reverse....
...Although Maverick alleges the Agrico standing requirements, they are not required because Maverick is a specifically named person whose substantial interests *493 are being determined in the proceeding under section
120.52(12)(a), rather than section
120.52(12)(b). Section
479.08, Florida Statutes (1999), specifically provides such standing to Maverick, stating that "[a]ny person aggrieved by any action of the department in denying or revoking a permit under this chapter may, within 30 days after receipt of the...
...The plaintiffs in Windom were not involved in any permitting process. The case is not applicable. Maverick does not seek a private cause of action against the owner of the Texaco sign permit under Chapter 479 as asserted by DOT. Rather, Maverick seeks a statutorily provided remedy pursuant to sections
479.08 and
120.52(12)(a), Florida Statutes (1999)....
CopyCited 2 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1757, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9260
...[1] We reverse on the rationale stated in Food `N Fun, Inc. v. Department of Transportation,
493 So.2d 23 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), and Wainwright v. Department of Transportation,
488 So.2d 563 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), because we find error in the application of section
479.08(1), Florida Statutes [2] to conclude in this case that "the permittee has violated ......
...It is therefore not proper, on this record, to conclude that the permits, when issued, violated law or regulations. Our conclusion above renders moot the several other issues presented by appellant. Because we reverse for failure to establish grounds for revocation under section 479.08, Florida Statutes, we need not consider the applicability of alternative provisions in the statutory scheme....
...(f) Activities conducted in a building principally used as a residence. [2] "... the department may revoke any permit ... where ... the application contains knowingly false or misleading information or ... the permittee has violated any of the provisions of this chapter ... ." (e.s.) Section 479.08(1), Florida Statutes....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1918, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9622
...The factual circumstances of this case are similar to those presented in Wainwright v. State of Florida Department of Transportation,
488 So.2d 563 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986), a case which also involved a reconsideration of the nature of the business activity conducted at Imperial Nurseries. While section
479.08, Florida Statutes, provides for permit revocation when "the permittee has violated any of the provisions of this chapter," in Wainwright this language was construed as requiring an "affirmative violation" beyond mere compliance with a prior position from which DOT subsequently recedes. See also, Food 'N Fun v. Department of Transportation,
493 So.2d 23 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). As in Wainwright, in the present case such an affirmative violation has not been established, and section
479.08 thus does not authorize the revocation of appellant's sign permit....
CopyCited 1 times | Published | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1946, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 9627
...Maxine F. Ferguson and A.J. Spall, Dept. of Transp., Tallahassee, for appellee. ZEHMER, Judge. Tri-State Systems, Inc. (Tri-State), appeals from a final order of the Department *183 of Transportation (DOT) revoking outdoor advertising permits pursuant to section 479.08, Florida Statutes (1983)....
...were issued. In September 1984 DOT issued notices of violation to Tri-State, stating there was an absence of visible commercial activity within the area to qualify the sites as unzoned commercial or industrial areas, and commenced proceedings under section 479.08, Florida Statutes (1983), to revoke the permits....
...In its final order, DOT adopted the recommendation and revoked Tri-State's sign permits. It was not found that "Dave's Garage" was not a bona fide business when the permit was originally approved. We hold that Tri-State has not been shown to have violated section 479.08....
...ute has subsequently changed. "It cannot be stated that, when that interpretation changes so as to render a previously lawful sign nonconforming, the permittee has committed a violation of the chapter so as to support revocation of his permits under section
479.08." Food 'n Fun, Inc. v. Department of Transportation,
493 So.2d 23 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). See also Wainwright v. Department of Transportation,
488 So.2d 563 (Fla. 1st DCA 1986). The appealed order is REVERSED. BOOTH, C.J., and JOANOS, J., concur. NOTES [1] Section
479.08 states in part: The Department has the authority to revoke any permit......
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2289, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10434
ERVIN, Judge. Appellant appeals from the revocation by the Department of Transportation of its outdoor advertising permits, pursuant to Section 479.08, Florida Statutes (Supp....
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2288, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10435
ERVIN, Judge. Bill Salter Outdoor Advertising Inc., appeals from a final order of the Florida Department of Transportation, revoking outdoor advertising permits pursuant to Section 479.08, Florida Statutes (Supp.1984)....
...that the business which provided the basis for approval of the permits issued by the department did not in fact exist when the permits were issued. Thus, the permits never complied with the requirements of Chapter 479, and were revocable pursuant to section 479.08....
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2278, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 10395
...We reverse on the authority of these decisions in that there was no evidence that the application for permit contained “knowingly false or misleading information” or that the appellant “has violated any of the provisions of ... [Chapter 479].” See Section 479.08(1), Florida Statutes....
CopyPublished | Florida 3rd District Court of Appeal | 11 Fla. L. Weekly 1424, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 8578
(1983), or in revocation proceedings under Section
479.08, Florida Statutes (1983). But a violation of
CopyPublished | District Court of Appeal of Florida | 12 Fla. L. Weekly 70, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 11036
ZEHMER, Judge. Chipley Motel appeals a final order of the Department of Transportation (DOT) revoking its outdoor advertising permit pursuant to section 479.08, Florida Statutes (1983)....
...DOT rejected the hearing officer’s conclusion that the department was estopped to revoke appellant’s permit, concluding that the doctrine of estoppel was not applicable and that maintenance of the sign in its present location was contrary to Florida law. The final order states in part: Section 479.08, Florida Statutes, authorizes the Department to revoke a permit when: ......
...e statute is a distinctive article indicating an alternative. ... The sign at issue is erected in an area which is not permittable under Chapter 479, Florida Statutes. The per-mittee has, accordingly, violated the provisions of Chapter 479 and under Section 479.08, the Department may revoke the permit at issue....
...*1359 DOT revoked the permit and ordered that Chipley remove the sign within thirty days of the final order. We hold that Chipley has not been shown to have committed an affirmative violation of chapter 479 so as to subject its permit to revocation under section 479.08....
...There is competent, substantial evidence in the record to support the hearing officer’s finding of fact that DOT, not Chipley Motel, made the error or mistake in the application in respect to the zoning classification of the site. The plain language of section 479.08 requires an affirmative act by the permittee which violates the statute....
...At the time of Chipley’s erection of the sign, it conformed to the permit issued pursuant to the application prepared in accordance with DOT’s instructions and interpretation of the law. Since an affirmative violation by the permittee has not been established, section 479.08 does not authorize the revocation of Chipley Motel’s sign permit....
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 11331, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 2626
PER CURIAM. The controlling question in this case is whether the Department of Transportation (Department) may invoke the provisions of § 479.08, Florida Statutes, as authority for revocation of an outdoor advertising permit where a change in the Department’s own interpretation of certain other provisions of Chapter 479 is the sole basis for the Department’s decision that the permit it previously issued should now be revoked....
