welcome to elawyers.us
Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
  1. Home
  2. Find a Lawyer
  8. Caitlin Rose Mawn
Caitlin Rose Mawn
Caitlin Rose Mawn
Visitors: 54
0
Bar #99545(FL)     License for 12 years
Tallahassee FL

Are you Caitlin Rose Mawn? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

15-003866  DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF PARI-MUTUEL WAGERING vs HAMILTON DOWNS HORSETRACK, LLC  (2015)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 09, 2015
The issues for disposition in this case are whether Hamilton Downs violated section 550.01215(3), Florida Statutes (2013), by failing to operate all performances specified on its license on the date and time specified, and whether the Division should be estopped from prosecuting Hamilton Downs.Petitioner failed to prove that Respondent failed to operate all of its permitted horse race performances at the date and time specified in its license.
17-001533PL  DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF PARI-MUTUEL WAGERING vs ROBERT G. DAWSON  (2017)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 13, 2017
Whether Respondent raced an animal that was impermissibly medicated or determined to have a prohibited substance present, in violation of section 550.2415(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2016),1/ as alleged in the Administrative Complaint; and, if so, what sanction is appropriate.Petitioner proved 18 counts of racing a greyhound with a drug. Separate counts for drugs that were possibly metabolites of primary drug constituted a mitigating factor.
16-006423PL  DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF PARI-MUTEL WAGERING vs TERESA M. POMPAY  (2016)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 02, 2016
Whether Respondent raced a horse that was impermissibly medicated in violation of section 550.2415(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2015), and implementing administrative rules1/ as alleged in the Amended Administrative Complaint; and, if so, what sanction is appropriate.Respondent's pari-mutuel license may not be disciplined based upon laboratory test results obtained pursuant to a de facto division policy relating to extraction and sealing of serum specimens that constitutes an unadopted rule.
15-004359RP  NORTH FLORIDA HORSEMEN'S ASSOCIATION, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF PARI-MUTUEL WAGERING  (2015)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 30, 2015
The issues for disposition in this case are whether proposed rules 61D-2.024(5); 61D-2.025(1), (2), (4), (7), and (8)(a); 61D- 2.028(2)(a)-(d), (6), (7), and (8); and 61D-2.029 are invalid exercises of delegated legislative authority as defined in section 120.52(8), Florida Statutes.Proposed rules 61D-2.024 & 2.025 (the "track" rules) are not invalid exercises of delegated legislative authority. Proposed rules 61D-2.028 (the "jockey" rules) & 61D-2.029 (the "publication" rule) are invalid exercises of delegated legislative authority.
15-004352RP  SECOND CHANCE JAI-ALAI, LLC vs DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF PARI-MUTUEL WAGERING  (2015)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 30, 2015
The issue is whether Proposed Florida Administrative Code Rule 61D-2.026(4) and (6) is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority, pursuant to sections 120.52(8) and 120.56(1)(a), Florida Statutes.Proposed rule is invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority for lack of specific grant of rulemaking authority and enlarging and modifying law implemented.
15-004353RP  WEST FLAGLER ASSOCIATES, LTD. vs DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF PARI-MUTUEL WAGERING  (2015)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 30, 2015
The issue is whether Proposed Florida Administrative Code Rule 61D-2.026(4) and (6) is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority, pursuant to sections 120.52(8) and 120.56(1)(a), Florida Statutes.Proposed rule is invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority for lack of specific grant of rulemaking authority and enlarging and modifying law implemented.
14-004716PL  DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF PARI-MUTUEL WAGERING vs KIRK M. ZIADIE  (2014)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Oct. 10, 2014
Whether Respondent raced an animal with a drug in violation of section 550.2415(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2012),1/ as alleged in the Administrative Complaints, and, if so, what sanction is appropriate.Petitioner's failure to follow its rule and its reliance upon an unadopted rule precluded a finding of violation on some counts, but Petitioner proved 18 counts of racing a horse with a drug which merited a fine of $18,000 and suspension for six years.
15-005037  KIRK ZIADIE vs DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF PARI-MUTUEL WAGERING  (2015)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 14, 2015
The issue is whether Petitioner's application for renewal of his professional occupational license as a thoroughbred horse trainer should be granted.Respondent failed to prove violation of section 550.2415(1)(a), Florida Statutes, because the procedures followed in conducting drug tests constituted an unadopted rule and were contrary to the adopted rule.
15-002326PL  DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF PARI-MUTUEL WAGERING vs KIRK ZIADIE  (2015)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 23, 2015
Petitioner's failure to follow its rule and its reliance upon an unadopted rule precluded a finding of violation on some counts, but Petitioner proved 18 counts of racing a horse with a drug which merited a fine of $18,000 and suspension for six years.
14-000001PL  DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BOARD OF MEDICINE vs NORRIS MICHAEL ALLEN, M.D.  (2014)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jan. 02, 2014
The issue in this case is whether the Respondent should be disciplined for not meeting the “standard of care” by not responding appropriately to calls to him, as an on-call obstetrician, to come to the hospital and assist with a delivery.DOH did not prove by clear and convincing evidence that on-call ob-gyn fell below standard of care by not responding to a request for assistance with a difficult delivery.

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer