Court Opinion

ID: 9411274
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-07-26 15:04:42.317441+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T17:21:06.078810
License: Public Domain

Third District Court of Appeal
                               State of Florida

                          Opinion filed July 26, 2023.
       Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing.

                            ________________

                             No. 3D22-1884
                  Lower Tribunal No. 2022-016184 CILB
                           ________________

                            Roger Llaurado,
                                  Appellant,

                                     vs.

    Department of Business and Professional Regulation,
                                  Appellee.

     An Appeal from the Department of Business and Professional
Regulation.

     Roger Llaurado, in proper person.

      Brooke Elizabeth Adams, Chief Appellate Counsel (Tallahassee), for
appellee.

Before EMAS, GORDO and LOBREE, JJ.

     PER CURIAM.
      Affirmed. See A & S Ent., LLC v. Fla. Dep’t of Revenue, 282 So. 3d

905, 908-909 (Fla. 3d DCA 2019) (“The basic cornerstones of procedural

due process are notice of the case and an opportunity to be heard. Due

process is satisfied where the notice and opportunity to be heard are ‘granted

at a meaningful time and in a meaningful manner’”) (additional citations

omitted); Jennings v. Dade Cty., 589 So. 2d 1337, 1340 (Fla. 3d DCA 1991)

(“A quasi-judicial hearing generally meets basic due process requirements if

the parties are provided notice of the hearing and an opportunity to be

heard”). See also Fla. Admin. Code R. 28-106.111(4) (providing: “Any

person who receives written notice of an agency decision and who fails to

file a written request for a hearing within 21 days waives the right to request

a hearing on such matters. This provision does not eliminate the availability

of equitable tolling as a defense”).

                                       2