# Sclease v. Construction Industry Licensing Board

> District Court of Appeal of Florida · August 24, 2004 · 881 So. 2d 98

URL: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7769257

## Case

- **Full name:** Louis SCLEASE, III, d/b/a Sclease Construction Co. CG C036233 v. CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD
- **Court:** District Court of Appeal of Florida
- **Decided:** August 24, 2004
- **Citations:** 881 So. 2d 98; 2004 Fla. App. LEXIS 12476; 2004 WL 1877582
- **Precedential status:** Published
- **Opinion:** Opinion of the court
- **Judges:** Benton, Browning, Polston
- **Cited by:** 3 later opinions in the Frix Law Library

## Citator (automated)

- No negative treatment found by the automated citator. That is not the same as a confirmation that the case is good law; read the citing cases.
- Full citator and citing cases: https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7769257

## How later opinions describe it (automated extraction)

- recognizing that “an agency has authority to vacate and reenter otherwise final orders in order to avoid due process problems”

## Opinion text

PER CURIAM.
Finding that a “Final Order” filed on October 9, 2003 “was not properly served,” the Construction Industry Licensing Board filed a “NOTICE OF REFILING OF FINAL ORDER,” on March 12, 2004. The NOTICE OF REFILING OF FINAL ORDER does not purport to be an order itself. While an agency has authority to vacate and reenter otherwise final orders in order to avoid due process problems, see Millinger v. Broward County Mental Health Div. And Risk Management, 672 So.2d 24 (Fla.1996); Johnson v. Terry Hunt Construction Co., 878 So.2d 1282 (Fla. 1st DCA 2004); Durando v. Palm Beach County, 719 So.2d 1258 (Fla. 1st DCA 1998), the NOTICE OF REFILING OF FINAL ORDER does not purport to be such a superseding order.
DISMISSED.
BENTON, BROWNING and POLSTON, JJ., concur.

---

Source: Frix Law Library, https://www.frixlaw.com/law-library/cases/7769257. Public record. Not legal advice.