Opinion
1D21-3417
10-26-2022
Michelle Wilson, Appellant, v. Florida Commission on Human Relations, Appellee.
Richard E. Johnson of Law Offices of Richard E. Johnson, Tallahassee, for Appellant. Jamie Ito of Ito Law, PLLC, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331.
On appeal from Florida Commission on Human Relations. Cheyanne M. Costilla, Executive Director.
Richard E. Johnson of Law Offices of Richard E. Johnson, Tallahassee, for Appellant.
Jamie Ito of Ito Law, PLLC, Tallahassee, for Appellee.
Per Curiam.
Affirmed. See Stanton v. Fla. Dep't of Health, 129 So.3d 1083 (Fla. 1st DCA 2013) (reaffirming that when a whistle-blower complaint does not meet the prima facie elements necessary to initiate operation of the Whistle-blower's Act, the Florida Commission on Human Relations has no authority to proceed with a fact-finding investigation); Washington v. Fla. Dep't of Revenue, 337 So.3d 502 (Fla. 1st DCA 2022) (holding that a protected disclosure must be a written and signed complaint in order to trigger the protections of the Whistle-blower's Act when a complainant has not claimed to have participated in an investigation or to have made a complaint through a hot-line).
Osterhaus, Bilbrey, and Nordby, JJ., concur.