The issue for determination is whether $3,940.92 was properly deducted from James Arnstein's $5,000.00 lottery prize.Respondent entitled to refund of some lottery winnings withheld for payment of child support where HRS failed to prove basis for full amount withheld

The issue in this case concerns the application of Section 24.115(4), Florida Statutes, to a claim for payment of a $5,000.00 lottery prize where the winning lottery ticket was purchased by two individuals, one of whom has a substantial court-ordered child support arrearage, one of whom does not, and the prize claim form is submitted by the individual who owes child support. The Petitioners contend that only half of the prize should be subject to the outstanding child support debt. The Respondents contend that the entire prize should be subject to the outstanding child support debt. Shortly after the filing of the request for hearing in this case, the Office of the Comptroller filed a Motion To Join Indispensable Parties, by means of which it sought to join the Department of the Lottery and the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services as parties to this case. Both of the last mentioned agencies agreed to being joined as parties and neither Petitioner objected to the joinder. Accordingly, the Department of the Lottery and the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services were joined as parties respondent. At the hearing both Petitioners testified and also offered exhibits. The Respondents presented the testimony of several witnesses and also offered several exhibits. At the conclusion of the hearing, the parties were allowed ten days within which to submit proposed recommended orders. All parties filed post-hearing submissions containing proposed findings of fact. All proposed findings of fact are specifically addressed in the appendix to this recommended order.Child support arrearages owed by prize claimant will be deducted from lottery prize even if claimant is only part owner of winning ticket

A final hearing in this case was held in Tallahassee, Florida on January 14 and 15, 1986, before Donald D. Conn, a duly designated Hearing Officer of the Division of Administrative Hearings. The parties were represented by: Petitioner: Sarah Bohr, Esquire Jacksonville Area Legal Aid, Inc. 604 Hogan Street Jacksonville, Florida 32202Emergency rule is invalid because it does not prevent immediate danger to health, safety , and welfare of public. Challenge to proposed rule is denied because Petitioner did not show rule was arbitrary or capricious.

Petitioner`s proposed lease of adult congregate living facility should be denied because the budget is unrealistic, allowing for raised Medicare expenditures.

Respondent's denial of lease to nursing facility based on its capital expenditure is not abuse of authority.

Whether Aaron Conover, a retarded child, is eligible to continue to attend the BARA Learning Center, Tallahassee, Florida. Whether the State of Florida Final Comprehensive Annual Service Program Plan for Social Security Act Title XX, October 1, 1975 - June 30, 1976 (CASPP) is a rule subject to be promulgated under Section 20.05, Florida Statutes and Chapter 120, Florida Statutes.Comprehensive Annual Service Program Plan (CASPP) plan denying educational opportunities to mildly retarded minor on basis of parental salary was improperly promulgated rule.