Leon FL Lawyers | Charles F Tunnicliff -- eLawyers

Ago (1974)

Florida Attorney General Reports Filed: Aug. 08, 1974

QUESTIONS: 1. Are foster group homes operated as a program of the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services subject to local zoning ordinances 2. Is property leased by a state agency, for purposes of fulfilling its statutory responsibilities, subject to local zoning ordinances SUMMARY: In the absence of an act of the State Legislature manifesting a legislative intent to waive the state's immunity from local zoning regulations, municipalities may not regulate, through the application or e..

Bankruptcy No. 87-4750-BKC-8P7, Adv. No. 87-0477 In Re Magee (1989)

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida Filed: Mar. 03, 1989 Citations: 98 B.R. 62

98 B.R. 62 (1989) In re Harold R. MAGEE Debtor. Shirley A. EXCELL and Alexander Excell and Nathaniel Excell Plaintiffs, v. Harold R. MAGEE Defendant. Bankruptcy No. 87-4750-BKC-8P7, Adv. No. 87-0477. United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division. March 3, 1989. Kass, Hodges & Massari, Tampa, Fla., for plaintiffs. Stichter & Riedel, Tampa, Fla., for defendant. ORDER ON DEFENDANT'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT ALEXANDER L. PASKAY, Chief Judge. THIS IS a Chapter 7 liquidation case and ..

76-1747 (1976)

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Filed: Sep. 27, 1976 Citations: 539 F.2d 501

539 F.2d 501 Ike BAILEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. J. Patrick McCANN, Director of the Pari-Mutuel Wagering Division of the Department of Business Regulation of the State of Florida, Defendant, Theodore J. Zornow, President of the United States Trotting Association, Defendant-Appellee. No. 76-1747 Summary Calendar. * United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. Sept. 27, 1976. W. Paul Thompson, Clayton J. M. Adkinson, DeFuniak Springs, Fla., for plaintiff-appellant. Harry Lewis Michaels, Tallahass..

76-1747 (1977)

Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit Filed: Apr. 14, 1977 Citations: 550 F.2d 1016

550 F.2d 1016 Ike BAILEY, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. J. Patrick McCANN, Director of the Pari-Mutuel Wagering Division of the Department of Business Regulation of the State of Florida, Defendant, Theodore J. Zornow, President of the United States Trotting Association, Defendant-Appellee. No. 76-1747. United States Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. April 14, 1977. W. Paul Thompson, Clayton Adkinson, DeFuniak Springs, Fla., for plaintiff-appellant. Harry Lewis Michaels, Tallahassee, Fla., for defendant-..

10-001704 DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF HOTELS AND RESTAURANTS vs STACKED SUBS (2010)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 30, 2010

The issues in DOAH Case No. 10-1704 are whether Respondent, Stacked Subs (Respondent), committed the violations alleged in the Administrative Complaint dated November 5, 2008, and, if so, what penalty should be imposed. Similarly, the issues in DOAH Case No. 10-2445 are whether Respondent committed the violations alleged in the Administrative Complaint dated June 24, 2009, and, if so, what penalty should be imposed.Respondent failed to address violations of the Food Code as critical problems were noted on not fewer than four inspections.

10-002445 DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF HOTELS AND RESTAURANTS vs STACKED SUBS (2010)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 06, 2010

The issues in DOAH Case No. 10-1704 are whether Respondent, Stacked Subs (Respondent), committed the violations alleged in the Administrative Complaint dated November 5, 2008, and, if so, what penalty should be imposed. Similarly, the issues in DOAH Case No. 10-2445 are whether Respondent committed the violations alleged in the Administrative Complaint dated June 24, 2009, and, if so, what penalty should be imposed.Respondent failed to address violations of the Food Code as critical problems were noted on not fewer than four inspections.

10-007767 DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF HOTELS AND RESTAURANTS vs DQ AT 39 AVE AND I-75 (2010)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 16, 2010

Whether Respondent committed the violations set forth in the Administrative Complaint and, if so, what is the appropriate disciplinary action that should be imposed.Respondent committed two critical and three non-critical violations of Food Code and rules. Recommend $2,500 administrative fine.

10-008902 DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF HOTELS AND RESTAURANTS vs FIVE STAR HAITIAN RESTAURANT (2010)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 03, 2010

The issue for determination is whether Respondent committed the offenses set forth in the Administrative Complaint dated December 2, 2009, and, if so, what action should be taken.Petitioner demonstrated Respondent had no certified food manager, no proof of employee training, and no proper hand drying provisions at the hand washing sink; and new owner failed to submit change of ownership application. Recommend admininstrative fine.

10-008904 DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF HOTELS AND RESTAURANTS vs TERIYAKI CAFE SUSHI AND GRILL (2010)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 03, 2010

The issues are whether Respondent committed food service violations, and, if so, whether disciplinary action should be taken. For the reasons set forth below, Respondent did commit violations and should be subject to the fine described herein.The Division proved by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent violated several provisions relating to food safety and cleanliness. A fine of $1,300 is warranted.

10-009285 DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF HOTELS AND RESTAURANTS vs CARVEL ICE CREAM BAKERY (2010)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 23, 2010

Whether the Respondent committed the violations alleged in the Administrative Complaint dated December 29, 2009, and, if so, the penalty that should be imposed.Division proved by clear and convincing evidence that restaurant had 3 critical and 1 non-critical violations of the Food Code. In consideration of mitigating circumstances, administrative fine of $525 recommended.

Charles F Tunnicliff