Loading...
Jessica Lao vs City of Edgewater - Petition of Writ of Certiorari Robin Matusick From: Tonda Nunn <tnunn@pgcs-tpa.com> Sent: Thursday,April 30, 2020 9:51 AM To: awolfe@doranlaw.com Cc: Robin Matusick; Karon LaVassaur Subject: Lao v.City of Edgewater/Writ of Cert/Claim 366510 Greetings, Please allow this email to serve as the acknowledgement and assignment of the above referenced claim, as I will be the handling adjuster. Mr. Wolfe, please advise of any information and/or documentation you may need from our office. I look forward to our working together. Best regards, Tonda Nunn Senior Liability Claim Specialist PGCS Claim Services PO BOX 958456 Lake Mary, FL 32795-8456 Office: (800)832-1400 ext. 4006 Direct: (321)832-1407 Fax: (321)397-5458 Email: tnunn@pgcs-tpa.com i Haley Walker From: Robin Matusick Sent: Wednesday,April 29,2020 1:46 PM To: Haley Walker Subject: FW:Jessica Lao v.City of Edgewater- Petition for Writ of Certiorari Attachments: Appendix.pdf,Certificate.pdf;Order.pdf; Petition for Writ of Cert.pdf Importance: High Also place this in—laserfiche - Cade Enforcement—Code Appeals When you place it in laserfiche—legal—suits please note that it is a code appeal case Thanks! Robin L. Matusick, CMC, City Clerk/Paralegal City of Edgewater PO Box 100 Edgewater, FL 32132 (386)424-2400 Ext#1101 rmatusick(a)citvofed zewater.ore From: Robin Matusick Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2020 12:45 PM To: Haley Walker(hwalker(u1CITYOFEDGEWATER.ORG) Subject: FW: Jessica Lao v. City of Edgewater- Petition for Writ of Certiorari Importance: High Hale} please place in laserfiche—suits file 0 Robin L. Matusick, CMC, City Clerk/Paralegal City of Edgewater PO Box 100 Edgewater, FL 32132 (386)424-2400 Ext 91101 rmatusick2citvofedgeii atei ora From: Robin Matusick Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2020 12:44 PM To: 'Danielle Ccggon' Cc: Glenn A. Irby Subject: FW: Jessica Lao v. City of Edgewater- Petition for Writ of Certiorari Importance: High Danielle, Please see the attached in which Ms Luo is suing regarding Code matter in which she was cited for a pig that she claims is an emotional support animal. Please note that we wish to use Aaron Wolfe of Doran, Sims. Wolfe. Cioceheth & Yoon if needed. 1 Let me know what else you might need from us on this matter! RobinL. Matusick, CMC, CilyClerk/Paralegal City of Edgewater PO Box 100 Edgewater, FL 32132 (386)424-2400 Ext 41101 rmatusick(a).citvofedeewater.ore From: Aaron Wolfe rmailto:awolfe(adoranlaw.coml Sent: Wednesday, April 29, 2020 10:27 AM To: Robin Matusick Cc: Karon LaVassaur Subject: Jessica Lao v. City of Edgewater-Petition for Writ of Certiorari Robin, attached please find a Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed by Jessica Lao against the City and the attached appendix. This is an appeal of Code Enforcement action relating to Lao's pig which she claims is an emotional support animal. The Court has entered the attached Order requiring the City to respond to the Petition within 20 days. I will timely file a response on behalf of the City. As always, please be sure to forward all of these documents to the City's insurance carrier as this may be a covered claim. Please let me know if you have any questions. Aaron Doran Sims Wolfe ���- Ciocchetti Yoon Artorne Ys at Lax Aaron R. Wolfe Attorney at Law Doran Sims Wolfe Ciocchetti &Yoon 1020 W. International Speedway Blvd., Suite 100 Daytona Beach, FL 32114 Office: 386-253-1111 Fax: 386-253-4260 Email: awolfe@doranlaw.com NOTE:Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, the State of Florida is under a Stay-at-Home Order until April 30'. Our office will be operational during our normal office hours(9:00 a.m. to 5:00 p.m.)but we will be closed to the public except for emergencies and extraordinary circumstances. We will be available via email and by phone. All calls to the office are being monitored by our receptionist who then will forward your message to the appropriate person. Voicemails are also being frequently checked. Thank you for your understanding and patience during these trying times and stay safe to remain healthy! "*"This electronic communication transmission contains information which may be privileged, confidential and/or exempt from disclosure under applicable law. The information is intended only for the use of the addressee named above. If you are not the intended recipient, you are hereby notified 2 that any disclosure, copying, distribution or other use of the contents of this electronic communication information is strictly prohibited. If you received this electronic communication in error, please notify me immediately by email reply. Thank you. 3 Filing# 106149002 &Filed 04/13/2020 10:51:21 AM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR VOLUSIA COUNTY,FLORIDA JESSICA LAO APPELLANT CITATION NUMBER: 3873 CODE ENFORCEMENT CASE NO.:20-00115412 V. CITY OF EDGEWATER,FLORIDA APPELLEE APPENDIX PETITION FOR WRIT OF CFRIORARI Appendix A—Citation and Order Appendix B—Certificate of Registration Appendix C—Physician's Letter e I < SICA LAQ Pro Se Appellant 2020 10519 CIDL EDGEWATER POLICE DEPARTMENT INSTRUCTIONS ❑ CITY ORDINANCE VIO TION You must elect one of the following options within 15 days of ❑WARNING NOTICE Nq �( the date of this citation: 3 7 3 NIMAL CITATION 13 1 ,. 61 1.0 Payment must be made by mail or in person,to the City TIE DHCERMGNED CERNFIE611NT RFpHE x08 JURT Rap REnsaNANE Y11 W Da TO eERttvaAnO ooEsaEIEVETHArox of Edgewater Finance Dept. 104 N.Riverside Drive. uroFwEaR MOHrx wY rPAa ❑AN Edgewater, FL 32132 between the tours of 8:30 a.m.and �U;li` ePM 4:30 p.m.Mon.-Fd. NOTE:YOU MUST ENCLOSE THIS HNIEIPhq PNar uoaE MT CITATION,IF YOU PAY BY MAIL. ��T v WFrEptRrTHPNw IroexsE uImI�M 2.0 If you wish to contest the charge,you must contact the 4 k olr crrc mnTE Meets City Clerk e I person and sign ,reqthe County hearing form. If the infraction is proven,the County Judge may WE SEX Impose a penalty not to exceed$500 par violation. mla>=R erArE Eun~RnTOM o iuE 3.❑This Is a mandatory court appearance and you may not uCE aE xuLWFa FL '-/j- pay a fine in Ileu appearing in court You will be notified STATE TA6E4PNE.- by mail when and where to appear. w.xIaEYFsa 'IEHU'EM,V.'E eTnE caLoa If you fail to pay the civil penalty within the time allowed, or fail to appear in court to contest the citation,you shall R" rA°" rnrrAo/ -ATE TYPE MEP. be deemed to have waived your right 10 contest the LoaTloHa ocwRRE 1Qe citation,and in such case,judgement may be entered a r ,t against you for an amount up to the maximum penalty. ON aISANFMLLYCOMNif FOLLOwwa OFFEN9E8: fplMTe SECIIRI/ OfFErRE: ll '3'- +�.,na! Fines) `fi bc.rg0 Violation#t) SELTCNE DF}EMaE: (Violation#2) SECIIIXIt CFTENBe (Volation#3) AMYKTrFEa: BREED- CpLppy (Violation#4) MNiM ' •>: ✓ .n.}5lit, I. :m Total 1. �O.Rd29 4% 'a 'T RY AnTION r}'f r aarc:h }1q I tr,it .� � i- Date ^��' h/2!) Piece G I � vn t} VERDICT: _ Check Only One _ Guilty - DmcEaepa ro/ TEsauEo: ❑ Not Guilty �v ❑ Dismissed [ACREETOCOMPLYMIDiNSIVERTO NECRAROEs sPMFIWN THIS CRAMK IA^^" ❑ Nolm Prosequl TO CD y WON NsnKXTX RS oil DIE REVERSE aw OF nis CDIa'fANT.WILLNL ❑ Other REFOSALlOACfEPTANoBN:It1H6gTA1NMNAMNDTYE/JlOROiINESEC .1: 113FNpg1Ir'y sxwATNe _ FINE AMOUNT L: COURT COSTS COSTS Defendant's Plea ❑ Gaily f}d N t Guilty ❑ Noto Contandre cow-R.me.rwM. CanlPla-AmRam-IVA.rn I Presiding Judge �a.t:x ,RmA.t� 0STEPHANIE WHITE, PSYD, PHD, LCSW, flC$W FL LCSW#SW8787 AK LCSW XCSWS10gggOu CA LCSW#LCSW24894 NV LCSW#7193-C 004MOZ4263 ?WA�pi%AK,99687 OV28IM19 To Whom It May Concern: Ana6ella Lao DOG:05A17/2W0)has been given a mental health eval"tild" I am familiar with this patient's history and with the functional limitations imposed by the patient's disability. Aralsella lao has been diagnosed with a Differential final(`DI')under the Diagnostic and Statistical Manual of Menial Disorders (DSM-V)that substantially limits one or more major life achvlties.The 01 meets the definition of disability under do Americans with Dhabilities Act,die Few Housing Act and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973.504. In order W reduce the impairment associated with the disability,enhance the ability to five Independently,fully use and enjoy a dwelling,and fly domestically.I am authorbing an emotional support animal.The emotional support animal will Lave a substandal impact in helping Arabella cope with symptoms of the disability.Reasonable accomnodation should be given to Arebelta such that Arabella should be allowed to live with the anhnal In a dwelling. Also,please allow Arabelia W be accompanied by the emotional support animal in tho cabin of the aircraft in accordance with the Air Carder Acted Act(49 U.S.0 41705 and 14 C.F.R.382). This letter meets the requirements under the Fair Housing Act The Fair Housing Act(Title VIII of the Civil Rights Act of 1968)).Section 504 of the Rehabilitation Act of 1973(Seddon 504 of the Rehabilitation AR of t973.Nb.L.Na.93-112,875tat 394 (Sept 26.19731,codified at 29 US.C.701 at seq.),and the Americans with Disabilities AR(Americans with Disabilities Act of 1990. Rub.L No.1D3-336,104 Sts,328(1990)). Sincerely, i Stephanie White,Psyl PhD,LCSW,DCSW I have been an LCSW in Florida since 2002(XSW6787). I have been an LCSW In Alaska since 2011(#CSWS10D4). I have been an LCSW in California since 20Dg(#LCSW24894). 1 have been an LCSW in Nevada since 2016(#7193-C). I have been an LCSW in klaho since 2009(#29960). 1 have been an LCSW in Wisconsin since 2018(#8957-123). 1 have been an LCSW in North Dakota since 2018(05630). 1 have been an LCSW In Wyoming since 2018(#LCSW-1141). I have been an LICSW in Iowa since 2018 C#092478). I have been an L1CSW In West Virginia since 2018(#DP00945408). I have been an LCSW in Montana since 2019(#BBH-LCSW-LIC-36995). I have been an LMSW in Nebraska since 2018(#2057). I have been an LCSW in Vermont since 2019(#W9.0134183). 1 have been an LCSW in Hawaii since 2019(#4416). I have been an LCSW in Texas since 2014(#60051). 'rbe parent Is awarethat a u me wgemt sde respumadrwm eswre tier theanimal/s beh Ws appropriately and compreswith any applicable law. O C Im oil ON ............ o fttg�i��MN, AS 20,72270 I Pi ertificate of Registration TjdS to Cffdfy that eo n GISTFRFD EMOTIONAL SUPPORT AN VAL .................. .... ........... IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE 7TH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR VOLUSIA COUNTY, FLORIDA JESSICA LAO, Petitioner, vs. CITY OF EDGEWATER, Case No: 2020-10519-CIDL Respondent. ORDER DIRECTING RESPONDENT TO RESPOND THIS CAUSE came before the Court on the Petition for Writ of Certiorari. It is hereby ORDERED that the Respondent in this cause shall, within twenty days of the date hereof, file a response to the Petition for Writ of Certiorari filed April 13, 2020. Within twenty days of the date of service of the Response, Petitioner may file a Reply in compliance with Rule 9.100(k), Fla. R. App. P. ORDERED AT Deland, Volusia County, Florida. /28�1 :4 r e-Signed 1'28:2020 11:42 AM 2020 10519 CIDL UIT JUD Copies furnished to parties by mail 04/28/2020 11:42:30 AM Clerk of the Circuit Court,Volusia County, Florida Filing # 106149002 E-Filed 04/13/2020 10:51:21 AM IN THE CIRCUIT COURT OF THE SEVENTH JUDICIAL CIRCUIT IN AND FOR VOLUSIA COUNTY,FLORIDA JESSICA LAO APPELLANT CITATION NUMBER: 3873 CODE ENFORCEMENT CASE NO.: 20-00115412 V. CITY OF EDGEWATER,FLORIDA APPELLEE PETITION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI COMES now the Appellant, JESSICA LAO, and hereby files this, her PETIION FOR WRIT OF CERTIORARI, of the City of Edgewater Special Magistrate Order dated March 12, 2020(attached hereto as Appendix"A")and in support thereof states as follows. FACTS I. On January 6, 2020, Animal Control Officer for the City of Edgewater, DENNIS O'DELL, visited the Appellant's home and advised her that there was a complaint issued because of the fact that she had what he constituted as a"pet pig" 2. Defendant explained to the Officer that the animal was not a"pet"but had been classified as an Emotional Support Animal by the United States of America US Service Animals(a copy of the Certificate of Classification is attached hereto as Appendix`B"). 3. Defendant also advised the Officer that her daughter's physician, Dr. Stephanie White, had classified her daughter as having a disability under the Americans with Disabilities Act, the Fair Housing Act and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973, 504. A copy of the correspondence from the physician is attached hereto as Appendix"C"). 2020 10519 CIDL 4. The Officer who visited the Appellant refused to receive or acknowledge any documentation regarding the pig(hereinafter referred to as"Oreo"). 5. A citation was issued on January 6, 2020 (a copy of the Citation is provided herewith as Appendix"A'). 6. All documents referred to herein are part of the record and are being incorporated herein for reference. 7. A hearing was held on March 12,2020,where the following occurred: a. Appellant arrived at the hearing and was asked if she had a pig named Oreo. Defendant explained it was her daughter's emotional support animal and was classified as such b. Appellant was told that pigs were not allowed in the City of Edgewater as pets. c. Appellant explained that Oreo was not a pet,but rather a registered and prescribed emotional support animal. d. The Special Magistrate presiding over the hearing, JACOB SCR[VNER (last name unclear on the Order and hereinafter referred to as the "Hearing Officer"), advised the Defendant that he was unclear as to what was an emotional support animal compared to a service animal and he was unsure of what was allowed and what the law was regarding support animals. e. The officer failed to review the documents presented by Appellant,and issued the Order in favor of the City of Edgewater, advising the Appellant she needed to seek counsel to determine what her rights were. The Appellant is unable to afford counsel in this regard. f. The Order dictated eighty dollars ($80.00) in fines and ordered the Appellant to remove the animal within thirty(30)days. ISSUES OF LAW TO BE REVIEWED I. Was it error for the Hearing Officer to determine,without any findings of fact or issuance of a proper Order stating reasons for upholding the citation, to overlook evidence in the record of Oreo being classified as an Emotional Support Animal? 2. Was the Appellant denied due process by the Hearing Officer in his failure to review the documents presented as evidence by the Appellant? 3. Is the Appellant, who has a daughter Differential Illness under the Diagnostic Manual of Mental Disorders, entitled to a reasonable accommodation under the Americans with Disabilities Act,the Fair Housing Act and the Rehabilitation Act of 1973,504? 4. Does the City of Edgewater have the authority to overlook a federally registered animal in enforcing its ordinances? SUPPORTING AUTHORITY Fair Houslan Act The Fair Housing Act prohibits discrimination in housing on the basis of race, color, religion, sex national origin, familiar status and disability. The Fair Housing Act makes it unlawful for a person to refuse "to make reasonable accommodations" in rules, policies, practices, when such accommodation may be necessary to afford such person's equal opportunity to use and enjoy a dwelling. A reasonable accommodation is a change,exception or adjustment of a rule, policy, practice or service that may be necessary for a person with a disability. Exceptions to no pet policies have been shown to be a reasonable accommodation. CASES REGARDING EMOTIONAL SIIPPORTANIMALS The first case regarding an emotional support animal as a reasonable accommodation was actually brought under the Rehabilitation Act. In Majors v. Housing Authority of the County of Dekalb, 652 F.2d 454, (5' Cit. 1981) the court held that an emotional support animal could be a reasonable accommodation upon a f 7p'5eser:•sarshowing of necessity. Numerous federal district and state courts have also ruled on this issue and many of them have found that the emotional support animal is a necessary reasonable accommodation. t BSBr -ftrThese cases are supported by the HUD administrative law judges' ("ALls") acceptance of emotional support animals as reasonable accommodations. Only two AU decisions have been published in which the ALJ ruled on a tenant's request for a reasonable accommodation involving an emotional support animal. In HUD v. Durra, the administrative law judge found that a tenant suffering from anxiety related to a physical condition,should have been allowed to keep his companion cat, as the tenant's physician and mental health counselor informed Respondents that the Complainant received significant emotional support from the cat and that this impacted his health. In that case,the judge described the Respondent as oblivious to the Complainant's disability and related needs: The evidence is clear that [Respondent] did not consider providing reasonable accommodation to Complainant simply because she did not believe [he] had a handicap which required it. This was based almost entirely on the fact that [Complainant] did not appear to have a handicap . . . By taking this position, [Respondent] rejected out-of-hand the opinions of Complainant's long term treating physician and his mental health counselor and showed a callous disregard for Complainant's health and well-being. Similarly, in HUD v. Riverbay Corporation, the administrative law judge found that the Complainant's long history of severe, recurrent I I'ps eeerrsmrdepression, as described by her physician, created a medically documented need for the companion animal. The judge rejected the housing provider's contention that by accommodating the tenant they would have to be open to similar requests by "people running out and getting a doctors note saying I need a dog. The ALJ stated that [Complainant's] dog enables her to experience the ordinary feelings enjoyed by persons not otherwise afflicted with her disability. Although the Respondent asserts that the soothing benefit of dogs can be enjoyed by all,it fails to acknowledge the terrier's special benefit for the Complainant. She testified that she relates to the dog in a way she cannot relate to people, and that through this relationship she has become stronger and more outgoing. Dr. Spikes testified that the terrier is a medical necessity for [Complainant's] well-being. In effect, the dog gives [Complainant]the same freedom that a wheelchair provides a physically disabled person. Since these decisions, a number of cases involving I emotional support animals have settled without formal adjudication. As one commentator stated,"[t]he agency has ensured, through its administrative judgments, that housing authorities accommodate emotional support animals." Perhaps most significantly, within the past year a United States District Court in Ohio expressly held that the FHA has no training requirement for emotional support animals. The judge confronted a defendant that refused to allow plaintiff to keep her dog, Scooby, as a reasonable accommodation providing treatment for plaintiff s daughter's anxiety disorder. In this case, the judge drew a distinction between the FHA and ADA, relying in part on recent HUD regulatory changes expressly allowing emotional support animals in public housing. This reasoning provides some of the strongest arguments that the FHA does not require that animals serving as reasonable accommodations meet the ADA definition of service animal. As the burden is much higher in having a emotional support animal in public housing,as opposed to the Appellant herein who is a homeowner, the City of Edgewater should make the reasonable accommodations required under the Fair Housing Act,The Rehabilitation Act and the ADA Act for Appellant's daughter's clearly established disability. The City of Edgewater's reckless disregard for the Appellant's daughter's wellbeing is well established in the record through their refusal to review and accept confirmation from her physician that Oreo is necessary for the wellbeing of this child. RF. .IF.FRI FOIIFSTF.D WHEREAS,the Appellant,JESSICA LAO,requests the following relief., L That the Hearing Officer's Order be reversed. 2. That Appellant be allowed to keep Oreo,her daughter's emotional support animal; 3. That arty and all fee and fines be waived. Dated this I P^day of April,2020. SICA LAO,Pro Se Appellant r �.�}�k�°G� ,� C�URTESV NC�TICE � _ Rio�-.fi�.�",c��'"�.�:cM �r.a . �F F 1 �R .. ��������-�� Code Enforcement Division w�NF°�rF� `",ad '^� PO �ox 100 0 �i z EpGE`WATE� 1605 South Ridgewocad Ave � "� -� Edgewater, Florida 32132 �. Q. (366)424-2400 Ext.2240 �Gg�� codeenforcement@cityofedgewater.org Date: January 7, 2020 Case Number: 24-00115412 HCIFFMAN WILLIAM C 617 BERWICK DR WINTER PARK, FL 32792 Violation Location: 203 TVIIO OAKS DR Sort Parcel ID: 84Q2-58-Op-0740 Pro�erty awner: H4FFMAN WILLIAM C Date of Violation(s): January 07, 2020 Violation(s) of Land D�velopment Code 1 Cade of Ordinances: SEC. 5-8 ANIMALS PR�HIBfTED It shalC be unlawful for an owner to keep or permit to be k�pt within the city any horses, hogs, Vietnamese pot-bellied pigs, shee�, goats, 6ees, cattle, chickens, or other farm animals, and any animal from the vuild, unfess said species are both kept on property appropriat�ly zaned and lawfully permitted, if necessary, by the Florida Fish and Wildfife Conservation Commission. All venomous snakes perm�tted by the Florida Fi�h and Wildlife Conservation Commission sh�ll alsa be requir�d to register with the city's animal control di�ision. The prohibitior� �ontained herein applicable to harses, hogs, Vietnarnese �ot-bellied pigs, sheep, goats, bees, cattle, chickens, or other farm animals shall nat apply to any pro�erty within the city that either: (1) Ma�ntains an agricultural prQperty designation with the Volt�sia County Praperky Appraiser's office as [ot� Jur�e 15, 20D9; or {2) Was previously zone� fQr agricultural purposes and proof is made ta the city that such species resided and existed on the property prior to any zoning change and hav�e continuously r�sided and existed on the proper�y since the zoning change. Please remove pig from property not zoned for aqriculture. Violation(s) must be corrected BEFORE: lmmediately upon receivinc� notice Code Enforcement Officer: Denis Odell It is Vour responsibility to contact the Code Enforcement Officer once the vialatianfs� has bee� corrected. Thank you for helping us to promote, protect and improve the health, safety and/or the economic welfare of the City of Edgewater. This courtesy notice is preliminary to enforcement action. CASE SUMMARY 2020-AC-P200061607 Citation# 3873 Hearing Date: March 12, 2020 Animal Control Officer: D. Odell DESCRIPTION: Lao, Jessica is the resident of the property located at 203 Two Oaks Drive in Edgewater, Florida. She has been found in violation of Section 5-8 (Animals Prohibited) of the City of Edgewater's Code of Ordinances. BACKGR�UN D: On ]anuary 6, 2020, Officer Odell received a voicemail from The head of the HOA of the Majestic Oaks subdivision stating the residents at Z03 Two Oaks Drive had a large pig on the property. Responding to the voicemail Officer Odell responded to the address to address the city ordinance violation. Upon arriving at the address Officer Odell met with the resident Jessica A Lao. Officer Odell confirmed with Lao that she did indeed have a pig on the property. When told she would have to get rid of the pig Lao claimed the pig was an emotional support animal and would not be getting rid of the pig and offered to get the paperwork to prove the status of the pig. Officer Odell refused the paperwork and let her know that the pig may be able to go on planes and is exempt to rental stipulations on animals that are not allowed it was still against city ordinance to keep a pig on residential property in the City of Edgewater. Lao insisted she would not get rid of the pig so Officer Odell issued a citation #3873 for city ordinance violation 5-8 (Animals Prohibited) Due to the citation being contested a notice of hearing was issued and mailed certified. STAFF RECOMMENDATION: StafF recommends the Special Magistrate find Jessica Lao in violation of Section 5- 8 {Animals Prohibited) of the Code of Ordinances and assess the citation fine of $80.00 and give the resident 30 days to remove the pig from the property.