Skip to Main Content. Please Contact Us if there is anything we can do to improve the Accessibility of this site.
  • Search:


Home / Complaints / Final Orders / Final Orders 1999 / FCHR Order No. 99-038

STATE OF FLORIDA
COMMISSION ON HUMAN RELATIONS

Jerrylene Barr, Petitioner,
V.
Columbia Ocala Regional Medical Center, Respondent
EEOC Case No. 15D940888
FCHR Case No. 94-C629
DOAH Case No. 98-2813
FCHR Order No. 99-038
FINAL ORDER DISMISSING PETITION FOR
RELIEF FROM AN UNLAWFUL EMPLOYMENT PRACTICE

Preliminary Matters
Petitioner
Jerrylene Barr filed a complaint of discrimination pursuant to the Florida Civil Rights Act of 1992, Sections 760.01 - 760.11, Florida Statutes (1993), alleging that Respondent Columbia Ocala Regional Medical Center committed an unlawful employment practice on the basis of Petitioner's race (Black) when it terminated her from her position.
The
allegations set forth in the complaint were investigated, and, on April 27, 1998, 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 Ocala, Florida, on March 2, 1999, before Administrative Law Judge Donald R. Alexander.
Judge
Alexander issued a Recommended Order of dismissal, dated April 14, 1999.
Pursuant
to notice, public deliberations were held on December 1, 1999, by means of Communications Media Technology (namely, telephone) before this panel of Commissioners. The public access point for these telephonic deliberations was the Office of the Florida Commission on Human Relations, 325 John Knox Road, Building F, Suite 240, Tallahassee, Florida, 32303-4149. At these deliberations, the Commission panel determined the action to be taken on the Recommended Order.


Finding of Fact

We
find the Administrative Law Judge's findings of fact to be supported by competent substantial evidence.
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.
We
adopt the Administrative Law Judge's conclusions of law.


Exceptions

Petitioner
filed exceptions to the Recommended Order in the form of two documents filed with the Commission at the same time, one a letter to Commission Clerk, Sharon Moultry, dated April 27, 1999, and one a document entitled, "Objection to Respondent' (sic) Recommended Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law."
The
second paragraph of the April 27, 1999, letter to Commission Clerk, Sharon Moultry, excepts to the Administrative Law Judge's consideration of Respondent's proposed recommended order, indicating that the Respondent's proposed recommended order was not timely filed.
In
a case before the Department of Community Affairs [Department] in which there was filed a Motion to Strike as untimely the proposed recommended order of an intervenor in the case, and in which the intervenor maintained that its proposed recommended order was timely filed by facsimile, the Department of Community Affairs denied the Motion to Strike, stating the following: "The Motion to Strike should have been directed to the ALJ [Administrative Law Judge], and not the Department. The Department cannot resolve the factual dispute concerning the asserted timely filing of the proposed recommended order by facsimile. Also, [intervenor's] proposed recommended order has already served its purpose of informing the ALJ of the [intervenor's] view of the evidence and the applicable law. The proposed recommended orders do not assist the Department's review of the Recommended Order. The Recommended Order has been reviewed in light of competent substantial evidence in the record, exceptions and responses to exceptions, and the applicable law, not against any of the proposed recommended orders." Rathkamp, et al. v. Department of Community Affairs, et al., 21 F.A.L.R. 1902, at 1904 (DCA 1998).
Employing
this same reasoning, we reject this exception..
All
the remaining exceptions contained in the two documents take issue with the Administrative Law Judge's findings from the evidence presented and inferences drawn therefrom, as well as the credibility of Respondent's witnesses. It is well settled that it is the Administrative Law Judge's function "to consider all of the evidence presented and reach ultimate conclusions of fact based on competent substantial evidence by resolving conflicts, judging the credibility of witnesses and drawing permissible inferences there from. If the evidence presented supports two inconsistent findings, it is the Administrative Law Judge's role to decide between them." Beckton v. Department of Children and Family Services, 21 F.A.L.R. 1735, at 1736 (FCHR 1998), citing Maggio v. Martin Marietta Aerospace, 9 F.A.L.R. 2168, at 2171 (FCHR 1986).
We
deny Petitioner's remaining exceptions..


Dismissal

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 Procedure 9.110.


Done and Ordered this 23rd day of December, 1999.
For The Florida Commission on Human Relations.
  Commissioner Whitfield Jenkins,
Panel Chairperson;
Commissioner Clarethea Brooks; and
Commissioner Chriss Walker
Filed this 23rd day of December, 1999,
in Tallahassee, Florida.
  
  Sharon Moultry
Clerk, Commission on Human Relations
325 John Knox Rd., Bldg. F, Suite 240
Tallahassee, FL 32303-4149
(850) 488-7082

NOTICE TO COMPLAINANT/PETITIONER

As
your complaint was filed under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, which is enforced by the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC), you have the right to request EEOC to review this Commission's final agency action. To secure a "substantial weight review" by EEOC, you must request it in writing within 15 days of your receipt of this Order. Send your request to Miami District Office (EEOC), One Biscayne Tower, 2 South Biscayne Blvd., Suite 2700, 27th Floor, Miami, FL 33131.

Copies furnished to:

Jerrylene Barr
P.O. Box 289
Reddick, FL 32686

Kip P. Roth, Esq.
2501 Park Plaza
Nashville, FL 37203

Donald R. Alexander, Administrative Law Judge, DOAH

James Mallue, Legal Advisor for Commission Panel