Leon FL Lawyers | Brian Francis McGrail -- eLawyers

95-003355BID SCHULMAN AND HOWARD, P.A. (CLAY COUNTY) vs DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (1995)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 06, 1995

The issue is whether the Department of Revenue (DOR) acted fraudulently, arbitrarily, illegally or dishonestly in the award of contracts for legal services regarding Child Support Enforcement (CSE) proceedings to R. Craig Hemphill, the Intervenor in this consolidated proceeding.Contractual dispute between petitioner and intervenor has no relevance to whether agency acted appropriately regarding bid award.

94-004672 J. ROBERT POWELL vs DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (1994)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 24, 1994

Whether Petitioner's awards suggestion is measurable and whether the suggestion resulted in actual savings or additional revenues for the State of Florida. Whether, to the extent actual savings or generated revenues can be established by the claimant, the decision to make an award and determination of the type and amount of an award is discretionary with the agency head.Petitioner claim for employee suggestion award of $81,000 denied because statutory limit of $2,000, agency head's discretion, and lack of proof amt collected.

94-005404BID REINHART AND MORELAND vs DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (1994)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 28, 1994

Did the Respondent State of Florida Department of Revenue (Department) act fraudulently, arbitrarily, or dishonestly in awarding the Child Support Enforcement (CSE) Legal Services Contract for Sarasota County, Florida to Steven Johnson, and thereby subvert the competitive bidding process?Insufficient evidence to show that Department acted fraudently, or dishonestly to subvert the bidding process.

90-004992 GAIL L. CRIM AND JOE E. CRIM, MARY EVELYN WOOD, AND JAMES L. DOUGLAS AND DORIS DOUGLAS vs DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES AND JOHN WIGGINS (1990)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 10, 1990

The issues concern the question of entitlement of Respondent Wiggins to the issuance of a coastal construction control line (CCCL) permit. See Section 161.053, Florida Statutes and Chapter 16B-33, Florida Administrative Code.Entitlement of applicant to coastal construction permit. Recommended grant.

91-003631 RICHARD O. THOMAS vs BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND (1991)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 11, 1991

Whether the after-the-fact permit sought by Petitioner for a single family dock that has been constructed within the Indian River Aquatic Preserve, Malabar to Vero Beach, should be granted and, if so, the conditions that should be imposed.As constructed, dock substantially complied with permit. Non-permitted portions of dock should be removed.

90-004285 SOUTH FLORIDA WATERWAYS IMPROVEMENT FOUNDATION, INC. vs BOARD OF TRUSTEES OF THE INTERNAL IMPROVEMENT TRUST FUND (1990)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 11, 1990

Whether petitioner has standing to request consent of use of marine bottoms? Whether the site in question lies within the John Pennekamp Coral Reef State Park? Whether petitioner's application for consent to dredge in two places east of Angelfish Creek should be granted, under Chapters 253 and 258, Florida Statutes (1989) and Chapters 16D and 18-21, Florida Administrative Code?Non-profit corporation can request park management desired by members. No dredging allowed in Pennekamp Park unless DNR ""specifically initiates.""

91-004558 ROY B. AND PATRICIA B. OLSEN vs DEPARTMENT OF NATURAL RESOURCES (1991)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 23, 1991

Whether Coastal Construction Control Line (CCCL) permit number ST-820 should be issued to the City of Venice, Florida under the facts and circumstances of this case.Evidence sufficient to show entitlement to permit for construction of wooden retaining wall seaward of coastal construction line.

20-002087F AGENCY FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES vs MEADOWVIEW PROGRESSIVE CARE CORPORATION GROUP HOME, OWNED AND OPERATED BY MEADOWVIEW PROGRESSIVE CARE CORPORATION (2020)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 30, 2020

The issue is to determine the amount of a reasonable attorney's fee to be paid by Petitioner (Agency) to Respondent (Meadowview), pursuant to section 57.105(1) and (5), Florida Statutes.Reasonable attorney's fee for defending two or three counts of administrative complaint seeking to discipline the license to operate a group home facility is $16,000.

08-005681 AGENCY FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES vs SILKY`S GROUP HOME, INC. (2008)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 14, 2008

Brian Francis McGrail