welcome to elawyers.us
Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
  1. Home
  2. Find a Lawyer
  8. Carolyn Songer Raepple
Carolyn Songer Raepple
Carolyn Songer Raepple
Visitors: 58
0
Bar #329142(FL)     License for 44 years
Tallahassee FL

Are you Carolyn Songer Raepple? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

94-002722RU  FLORIDA ELECTRIC POWER COORDINATING GROUP, INC.; THE FLORIDA CHAMBER OF COMMERCE, INC.; FLORIDA FARM BUREAU FEDERATION; ASSOCIATION OF FLORIDA COMMUNITY DEVELOPERS; AND FLORIDA HOME BUILDERS ASSOCIATION vs SUWANNEE RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, ST. JOHNS RIVER WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT, AND DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  (1994)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 13, 1994
Whether the following proposed rules are invalid exercises of delegated legislative authority as defined in Subsection 120.52(8), Florida Statutes: 1. Rules 40E-400.417(1)(c), 40E-400.427(1)(b), 40E-431.(1)(g), 40E- 400.475(1)(a), (b), 40E-400.483, and 40E-400.487. Subsections 4.2.4.3(f), (g), (h), (i) of the South Florida Water Management District's Basis of Review. Subsection X.2.7(a) of Suwannee River Water Management District's Applicant's Handbook: Environmental Resource Permitting, St. Johns River Water Management District's Applicant's Handbook: Management and Storage of Surface Waters, and South Florida Water Management District's Basis of Review. Subsection X.2.7(b) of Suwannee River Water Management District's Applicant's Handbook: Environmental Resource Permitting, St. Johns River Water Management District's Applicant's Handbook: Management and Storage of Surface Waters, and South Florida Water Management District's Basis of Review. Subsection X.3.2.2 of Suwannee River Water Management District's Applicant's Handbook: Environmental Resource Permitting, St. Johns River Water Management District's Applicant's Handbook: Management and Storage of Surface Waters, and South Florida Water Management District's Basis of Review. 6. Rules 62-330.200(1)(d), 62-330.200(2)(h), and 62-330.200(4)(b).Engineer had standing to challenge Environmental Rules Permitting (ERP). Rules are valid.
01-000189BID  SPRINT PAYPHONE SERVICES, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS  (2001)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jan. 16, 2001
Whether the proposal Petitioner submitted in response to Respondent's Request for Proposal No. 00-DC-7295 was non- responsive.Proposal submitted by Petitioner in response to Request for Proposals was non-responsive. Petitioner does not have standing to further pursue its protest of the agency`s proposed action. Petitioner`s bid protest should be dismissed.
00-000849  SAMPSON CREEK COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DISTRICT vs FLORIDA LAND AND WATER ADJUDICATORY COMMISSION AND MONROE COUNTY  (2000)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Feb. 24, 2000
The issue in this proceeding is whether the petition to establish the Sampson Creek Community Development District meets the applicable criteria set forth in Chapter 190, Florida Statutes, and Chapter 42-1, Florida Administrative Code.Petitioner showed that the development district met statutory criteria and that the Petition to Establish the Sampson Creek Community Development District should be granted.
98-003711BID  INTERNATIONAL INVESTMENT COUNSEL, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS  (1998)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 20, 1998
Whether a contract exists for the lease of office space in Shalimar, Florida, between the Department of Corrections (DOC) and International Investment Counsel, Inc. (IIC).Once the time for protest has passed the following notification of bid award, a contract is formed between the agency and winning bidder.
94-005675EPP  IN RE: FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, MANATEE ORIMULSION PROJECT, APPLICATION NO. 94-35 vs *  (1994)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Oct. 07, 1994
This proceeding was conducted pursuant to the Florida Electrical Power Plant Siting Act, Section 403, Part II, Florida Statutes (F.S.), to determine whether final certification should be granted for FPL's Manatee Orimulsion Conversion Project (Project), and if certification is granted, what conditions of certification should be imposed.Siting Board remanded for findings on new proposed conditions of site certif. for FPL's proposed Orimulsion conversion projects after District Court vacated Bd's FO denying certification. Additional conditions also were considered. RO: certify project.
96-001123F  DOUGLAS REYMORE vs DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE  (1996)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 04, 1996
The issues presented are whether Petitioner is entitled to an award of (1) the reasonable attorney's fees and costs he incurred in DOAH Case No. 95-3137BID pursuant to the Florida Equal Access to Justice Act and (2) his attorney's fees and costs incurred in this proceeding pursuant to Section 120.569(2)(c) [formerly 120.57(1)(b)5], Florida Statutes.Successful bid protestor entitled to fees for that proceeding and additional fees due to Department filing pleadings for improper purposes herein.
96-001122F  PICKETT, FANELLI AND O'TOOLE, P. A. vs DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE  (1996)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 04, 1996
The issues in this case are: whether Petitioner is entitled to attorneys' fees and costs incurred in DOAH case no. 95-3138BID pursuant to Section 57.111, Florida Statutes; and, if so, in what amount; and whether Petitioner is entitled to attorneys' and costs incurred in the instant case pursuant to Section 120.57(1)(b)5, Florida Statutes.Petitioner prevailed as small business entitled to fees at maximum and under improper purpose provision.
95-000465BID  KNIGHT ENERGY TURNPIKE SERVICES vs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION  (1995)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Feb. 01, 1995
This is a bid protest proceeding in which the Petitioner challenges the Department's notice of intent to award the contract under RFP-DOT-94/95-8006 to the Intervenor Martin Petroleum Corp. Petitioner, who is the fifth-ranked bidder, contends that all four of the higher ranked bidders submitted non- responsive bids, that its own bid was responsive, and that it should be awarded the subject contract.Evidence in bid challenge case was insufficent to show that agency decision was arbitrary or capricious; agency interpretation of Request For Proposal was reasonable.
95-003137BID  DOUGLAS REYMORE vs DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE  (1995)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 22, 1995
The issue presented is whether the Department acted fraudulently, arbitrarily, illegally, or dishonestly in determining that the Intervenor, rather than Petitioner, should be awarded the contract for child support enforcement legal services for Martin and Okeechobee Counties.Successful protest of bid award where proposal submitted by apparent winner was non-responsive and score received from evaluation committee illogical.
95-003138BID  PICKETT, FANELLI AND O'TOOLE, P. A. vs DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE  (1995)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 22, 1995
The central issue in this case is whether the Department of Revenue (Department) acted illegally, fraudulently, arbitrarily, or dishonestly in awarding the child support enforcement (CSE) legal services contract for Palm Beach County (Intrastate) to the Intervenor, Thomas & Associates, Attorneys at Law, P.A. (Thomas). The Petitioner, Pickett, Fanelli, & O'Toole, P.A. (Pickett), timely challenged the proposed award.Proposal failed to supply mandatory information therefore nonresponsive per solicitation.

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