Leon FL Lawyers | Carolyn Stone Holifield -- eLawyers

93-004271BID PAB CONSULTANTS, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (1993)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 03, 1993

The issue for determination is whether Respondent's intent to award a contract for bridge-tending services (RFP DOT 92/93 2088 REBID) to Intervenor constitutes fraudulent, arbitrary, capricious, illegal or dishonest action.Absent proof that award of bid for bridge-tending services is arbitrary, fraudulent, capricious, illegal or dishonest award should be made to Intervenor.

92-004859BID V. S. M., INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (1992)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 10, 1992

Whether the bid submitted by VSM of Florida, Inc., under cover of the bid blank issued to VSM, Inc. for the construction on State Project 16070-3511 (the Project), with the Florida Department of Transportation (Department), was the lowest responsive bid. Whether the Department acted arbitrarily, illegally, dishonestly or fraudulently in rejecting the bid submitted by VSM of Florida, Inc. under cover of the bid blank issued to VSM, Inc. for the construction of the Project based on the Department's determination that VSM of Florida, Inc. was not a prequalified contractor. Whether VSM, Inc., has standing to bring this bid protest by and on behalf of its operating subsidiary, VSM of Florida, Inc.An agency would be acting arbitrarily if it refused to excercise its discre- tion by allowing bidder to cure minor technical irregularity after the fact.

92-004858BID MIDDLESEX CORPORATION AND AFFILIATES, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (1992)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 10, 1992

The issue in this proceeding is whether Petitioner, The Middlesex Corporation and Affiliates (Middlesex) or Intevenor, J. B. Coxwell Contracting, Inc. (J. B. Coxwell), submitted the lowest and best responsive bid for State Project No. 55040-3521 let by the Florida Department of Transportation (FDOT).Bid dispute-conflict between plans and speculations on whether item would be paid or not paid-evidence did not show DOT's decision arbitrary or impacted fairness

92-001872 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION vs THOMAS J. BACHOTA (1992)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 25, 1992

The issue in this case is whether the $124.00 penalty assessed against Respondent by the Department of Transportation is legally and mathematically correct.Under facts of this case st scale wgt had no presumption of correctness but overweight vehicle fine upheld where state's prima facie case not overcome.

91-006804RP JUICE BOWL PRODUCTS, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (1991)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Oct. 25, 1991

The issues in this case are (1) whether the Florida Department of Transportation ("FDOT") acted arbitrarily and capriciously in deciding to repeal Rule 14-26.0131, Florida Administrative Code, and (2) whether the proposed repeal is invalid because the economic impact statement was inadequate.Evidence insufficient to show that proposed repeal of rule was arbitrary or capricious; evidence insufficient to invalidate economic impact statement.

91-006566 DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION vs FATHER AND SON MOVING AND STORAGE (1991)

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

Whether a sign owned by Respondent and located on the southbound side of I- 95 north of Pembroke Road in Broward County, Florida, violates Chapter 479, Florida Statutes, as alleged in the notice dated August 8, 1991; and if so, what penalty should be imposed.Moving and storage Company who placed unpermitted sign on side trailer on property of another after 1st notice of violation for same act should remove sign within 10 days

85-003638BID ROLM CO. AND TEL PLUS COMMUNICATIONS vs. LEON COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD (1985)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Latest Update: Dec. 05, 1985

School Board Request For Proposal (RFP) technically not governed by expedited Section 120.53, Florida Statutes, process. RFP was not fatally ambiguous. Award of telephone system should not go to protestor.

Carolyn Stone Holifield