Bickel — affirmed denial of a petition to waive a statutory requirement

Case
Meghan D. Bickel v. State of Florida Department of Financial Services, et al.
Court
Florida First District Court of Appeal
Judge
Osterhaus, C.J.; Rowe, J.; Bilbrey, J.
Date Decided
September 30, 2026
Docket No.
1D2025-2070
Topics
Administrative Law; Statutory Waivers; Judicial Review
Source
Read the full opinion

Background

Meghan D. Bickel petitioned the Florida Department of Financial Services for a waiver of a statutory provision. The Department denied the petition after determining that section 120.542, Florida Statutes (2025), did not authorize it to waive statutory requirements.

A Department hearing officer issued a recommended order upholding the denial. The Department adopted that recommendation in a final administrative order, which Bickel appealed to the Florida First District Court of Appeal.

The Court’s Holding

The First District affirmed the Department’s final administrative order in a per curiam decision. The court’s majority disposition provided no written reasoning beyond “AFFIRMED.”

Judge Bilbrey wrote separately in concurrence. He explained that Bickel had not demonstrated any ground under section 120.68(7), Florida Statutes, for setting aside the final order and that affirmance of the agency action was therefore proper under section 120.68(8).

Key Takeaways

  • The First District left intact the Department’s denial of Bickel’s petition for a statutory waiver.
  • The Department concluded that section 120.542 authorizes no waiver of statutory requirements.
  • Judge Bilbrey’s concurrence concluded that Bickel failed to establish a statutory basis for overturning the final agency action.

Why It Matters

The decision preserves the Department’s determination that its waiver authority under section 120.542 does not extend to statutory requirements. Because the per curiam affirmance contains no majority analysis, however, the opinion itself offers little guidance beyond the result; the stated rationale appears only in Judge Bilbrey’s concurrence.

✉️ Get tomorrow’s cases before your first coffee
Daily Case Law is our free morning digest — the most substantive new decisions, filtered to your jurisdictions and topics, each linking back here for the full analysis.

Leave a Comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Scroll to Top