G.F.C. v. Pace
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED G.F.C., A CHILD, Appellant, v. Case No. 5D16-1923 DR. DEBRA P. PACE, SUPERINTENDENT OF SCHOOLS, Appellee. ________________________________/ Opinion filed September 7, 2017 Administrative Appeal from The School Board of Osceola County. Andrew C. Hill, and Stephen J. Calvacca, of NeJame Law, PA, Orlando, for Appellant. Amy J. Pitsch, Usher L. Brown, Susana Cristina Garcia, and Victor Kline, of Greenspoon Marder, Orlando, for Appellee. PER CURIAM. We grant Appellee’s motion to dismiss this appeal for the reasons explained below. Following investigation and an expulsion hearing, Appellee determined that Appellant had falsely claimed that one of her teachers touched her inappropriately. Appellant was given the choice of accepting expulsion or accepting an administrative transfer from her then-current school to a virtual school with the right to return to her original school in January 2017. Appellant, with her parents’ agreement, chose to accept the administrative transfer. Appellant timely, but improperly, appealed the order imposing her punishment. "[H]earings that result in expulsion fall within the [Administrative Procedure Act ("APA")] and are entitled to judicial review in the appropriate district court." D.K. ex rel. Kennedy v. Dist. Sch. Bd. Indian River Cty., 981 So. 2d 667, 667 (Fla. 4th DCA 2008) (citing § 1006.07(1)(a), Fla. Stat. (2006)). However, hearings that result in suspension do not fall under the APA, and thus are exempt from its protections. Id. Judicial review of proceedings that result in expulsion are permitted under the APA, and “not those where expulsion is a possibility.” Id. at 668. Appellate courts have “no jurisdiction to review a direct appeal of a School Board’s decision that results in suspension.” Id. at 667. Because Appellant’s punishment for making the false accusation was an administrative transfer, rather than expulsion, the order is not appealable. Appellee’s motion to dismiss the appeal for lack of jurisdiction is granted. APPEAL DISMISSED. ORFINGER, EVANDER, and EDWARDS, JJ., concur. 2
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
