Tabak filed a complaint of discrimination pursuant to the
Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992, Sections 760.01 - 760.11,
Florida Statutes (2001), alleging that Respondent Office
Depot committed an unlawful employment practice on the bases of
Petitioner’s religion (Judaism), disability (unspecified in
complaint), and age (DOB: 6-29-55), and on the basis of
retaliation, when it terminated Petitioner from his position.
The allegations set forth in the
complaint were investigated, and, on March 12, 2004, the
Executive Director issued his determination finding that there
was no reasonable cause to believe that an unlawful employment
practice had occurred.
Petitioner filed a Petition for
Relief from an Unlawful Employment Practice, and the case was
transmitted to the Division of Administrative Hearings for the
conduct of a formal proceeding.
An evidentiary hearing was held in
Fort Myers, Florida, on July 1, 2004, before Administrative Law
Judge Fred L. Buckine.
Judge Buckine issued a Recommended
Order of dismissal, dated October 1, 2004.
The Commission panel designated
below considered the record of this matter and determined the
action to be taken on the Recommended Order.
Findings of Fact
We find the Administrative Law
Judge’s findings of fact to be supported by competent
We adopt the Administrative Law
Judge’s findings of fact.
Conclusions of Law
We find the Administrative Law
Judge’s application of the law to the facts to result in a
correct disposition of the matter.
Since we have adopted the
Administrative Law Judge’s finding on the merits that no
unlawful employment practice occurred, and we herein conclude
that no error of law was made by the Administrative Law Judge in
reaching this conclusion, we find it unnecessary to either
accept or reject the Administrative Law Judge’s conclusion that
the Petition for Relief was not timely filed. See Cesarin v.
Dillards, Inc., FCHR Order No. 03-037 (April 29, 2003),
wherein a Commission panel made the same determination in
similar circumstances as to whether to accept or reject
conclusions of law relating to the timeliness of the Petition
for Relief; Harris v. Childrens Home Society, FCHR Order
No. 04-072 (June 25, 2004); and Cox v. University of Florida,
FCHR Order No. 04-145 (November 4, 2004). See, also,
Kalmbacher v. Department of Environmental Protection, 23
F.A.L.R. 3377, at 3378 (FCHR 2001) and Olivera v. City of
Hallandale, FCHR Order No. 02-025 (FCHR 2002) where, in both
cases, a Commission panel indicated that since the
Administrative Law Judge decided the case on the merits, and
findings of fact were adopted which found against the
Petitioner, it was unnecessary for the Commission to either
accept or reject conclusions of law that the complaint in the
matter was not timely filed.
With these comments, we adopt the
Administrative Law Judge’s conclusions of law.
Neither party filed exceptions to
the Administrative Law Judge’s Recommended Order.
The Petition for Relief and
Complaint of Discrimination are DISMISSED with prejudice.
The parties have the right to seek judicial review of this
Order. The Commission and the appropriate District Court of
Appeal must receive notice of appeal within 30 days of the date
this Order is filed with the Clerk of the Commission.
Explanation of the right to appeal is found in Section 120.68,
Florida Statutes, and in the Florida Rules of Appellate
Done and Ordered this 23rd day of December, 2004.
For The Florida Commission on Human Relations.