Case Name: Ray E. GANS, D. C., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION, Division of Professions, Board of Chiropractic Examiners, Appellee
Court: Florida District Court of Appeal
Jurisdiction: Florida
Decision Date: 1980-11-04
Citations: 390 So. 2d 107
Docket Number: No. 79-186
Parties: Ray E. GANS, D. C., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION, Division of Professions, Board of Chiropractic Examiners, Appellee.
Judges: Before HUBBART, C. J., and HENDRY and NESBITT, JJ.
Reporter: Southern Reporter, Second Series
Volume: 390
Pages: 107–107

Head Matter:
Ray E. GANS, D. C., Appellant, v. STATE of Florida, DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL AND OCCUPATIONAL REGULATION, Division of Professions, Board of Chiropractic Examiners, Appellee.
No. 79-186.
District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District.
Nov. 4, 1980.
Bartel & Shuford and Stanley Jay Bartel, Miami, for appellant.
Jim Smith, Atty. Gen., and John Griffin, Asst. Atty. Gen., for appellee.
Before HUBBART, C. J., and HENDRY and NESBITT, JJ.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM.
The administrative order under review is affirmed upon a holding that: (a) the standard of proof employed by the hearing examiner in reaching the findings of fact in this cause was not one of preponderance of the evidence, as both parties to this appeal have mistakenly assumed, and, accordingly, we have no occasion to determine whether the utilization of such a standard would in the abstract, constitute reversible error, as urged by appellant, it being abundantly clear that such an alleged error did not occur in this case, Cottrell v. Amerkan, 160 Fla. 390, 35 So.2d 383, 384 (1948) (court syllabus no. 1); 3 Fla.Jur.2d "Appellate Review" § 286 (1978); and (b) the excessive penalty point raised by the appellant herein has no merit. Florida Real Estate Commission v. Webb, 367 So.2d 201 (Fla.1979).
Affirmed.