welcome to elawyers.us
Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change
  1. Home
  2. Find a Lawyer
  7. D Ty Jackson
D Ty Jackson
D Ty Jackson
Visitors: 99
0
Bar #41216(FL)     License for 17 years
Tallahassee FL

Are you D Ty Jackson? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

Related Laws :

USC: 42 U.S.C 1395w

CFR: 42 CFR 422, 42 CFR 422.350, 42 CFR 422.350, 42 CFR 422.350, 42 CFR 422.352, 42 CFR 422.354, 42 CFR 447.25

Florida Laws: 104.31, 112.312, 112.313, 112.322, 112.3241, 120.52, 120.536, 120.54, 120.56, 120.569, 120.57, 120.595, 120.68, 17.001, 17.002, 20.165, 206.25, 255.0516, 335.18, 335.1825, 335.188, 335.199, 339.135, 395.002, 400.235, 408.031, 408.032, 408.033, 408.034, 408.035, 408.037, 408.039, 408.042, 408.045, 408.0455, 409.901, 409.902, 409.906, 409.908, 409.912, 409.91211, 409.913, 409.962, 409.966, 409.974, 455.2273, 456.053, 479.105, 489.119, 489.129, 489.142, 489.1425, 553.73, 57.105, 641.316, 73.131

Florida Administrative Code: 28-106.217, 28-110.002

18-1177  BREON T. DAVIS v. STATE OF FLORIDA  (2018)
District Court of Appeal of Florida Filed: Jul. 26, 2018
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT BREON T. DAVIS, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. No. 4D18-1177 [July 26, 2018] Appeal of order denying rule 3.800 motion from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Paul L. Backman, Judge; L.T. Case Nos. 09-003309CF10B, 09-005099CF10A and 11- 008711CF10A. Breon T. Davis, Raiford, pro se. No appearance required for appellee. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. TAYLOR, MAY and FORST, JJ., concur. * * * Not ..
17-2052  Sammie Investments v. Strategica Capital Associates  (2018)
District Court of Appeal of Florida Filed: May 09, 2018
Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed May 9, 2018. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. _ No. 3D17-2052 Lower Tribunal No. 17-14434 _ Sammie Investments, LLC, a Florida Limited Liability Company, Appellant, vs. Strategica Capital Associates, Inc., Appellee. An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Barbara Areces, Judge. Borowski & Traylor, P.A., and T.A. Borowski, Jr., and Darryl Steve Traylor, Jr., (Pensac..
  Syndicate Gramercy v. Daoud  (1949)
Supreme Court of Florida Filed: Oct. 07, 1949 Citations: 43 So. 2d 334
The plaintiff-appellant, Syndicate Gramercy, Inc., by an amended petition filed under Chapter 87, F.S.A., being the Declaratory Judgment Act, prayed for an adjudication of whether or not a lease on described property situated in the City of Miami Beach was now in force and a binding legal obligation as between the parties, or had expired by operation of law and was no longer a binding lawful obligation. The lease was executed in 1942, at an annual rental of $4,500.00. Its duration was for the per..
17-006578RP  FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF THE AMERICAN INSTITUTE OF ARCHITECTS, INC. vs FLORIDA BUILDING COMMISSION  (2017)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Dec. 06, 2017
The issue in this case is whether certain proposed amendments to Florida Administrative Code Rule 61G20-2.002 enlarge, modify, and/or contravene the cited provisions of law implemented, so as to render the proposed amendments invalid exercises of delegated legislative authority.Proposed rule amendments are valid as to objections raised, shown to implement specific powers and duties in the 2017 law that changed the Florida Building Code triennial update process.
17-000510CON  BAYFRONT HEALTH PORT CHARLOTTE vs SARASOTA COUNTY PUBLIC HOSPITAL DISTRICT, D/B/A SARASOTA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL AND AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION  (2017)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jan. 23, 2017
Whether Certificate of Need (CON) Application 10457 filed by Sarasota County Public Hospital District (SCPHD), d/b/a Sarasota Memorial Hospital (SMH), seeking approval for a new 90-bed acute care hospital to be located in Venice, Florida, zip code 34275, acute care service district 8, Subdistrict 8-6, on balance, satisfies the applicable statutory and rule review criteria. Whether CON Application 10458 filed by Venice HMA Hospital, LLC, d/b/a Venice Regional Bayfront Health, a/k/a Venice Regional Medical Center (VRMC), seeking approval to replace its existing 312-bed general acute care hospital with a 210-bed hospital to be located near Venice, Florida, in zip code 34292, acute care service district 8, Subdistrict 8-6, on balance, satisfies the applicable statutory and rule review criteria. Whether Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) rule 59C-1.008(4) (Rule) requires a CON application for a general hospital to contain an audited financial statement and, if so, whether the Rule is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority upon which the substantial interests of a party have been determined, in violation of section 120.57(1)(e), Florida Statutes.1/The Sarasota Memorial Hospital and Venice Regional Medical Center CON applications for general hospitals in Sarasota County should both be approved.
17-000551CON  FAWCETT MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, INC., D/B/A FAWCETT MEMORIAL HOSPITAL, AND ENGLEWOOD COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, INC., D/B/A ENGLEWOOD COMMUNITY HOSPITAL vs SARASOTA COUNTY PUBLIC HOSPITAL DISTRICT, D/B/A SARASOTA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL AND AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION  (2017)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jan. 23, 2017
Whether Certificate of Need (CON) Application 10457 filed by Sarasota County Public Hospital District (SCPHD), d/b/a Sarasota Memorial Hospital (SMH), seeking approval for a new 90-bed acute care hospital to be located in Venice, Florida, zip code 34275, acute care service district 8, Subdistrict 8-6, on balance, satisfies the applicable statutory and rule review criteria. Whether CON Application 10458 filed by Venice HMA Hospital, LLC, d/b/a Venice Regional Bayfront Health, a/k/a Venice Regional Medical Center (VRMC), seeking approval to replace its existing 312-bed general acute care hospital with a 210-bed hospital to be located near Venice, Florida, in zip code 34292, acute care service district 8, Subdistrict 8-6, on balance, satisfies the applicable statutory and rule review criteria. Whether Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) rule 59C-1.008(4) (Rule) requires a CON application for a general hospital to contain an audited financial statement and, if so, whether the Rule is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority upon which the substantial interests of a party have been determined, in violation of section 120.57(1)(e), Florida Statutes.1/The Sarasota Memorial Hospital and Venice Regional Medical Center CON applications for general hospitals in Sarasota County should both be approved.
17-000556CON  SARASOTA COUNTY PUBLIC HOSPITAL DISTRICT, D/B/A SARASOTA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL vs VENICE HMA HOSPITAL, LLC, D/B/A VENICE REGIONAL BAYFRONT HEALTH AND AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION  (2017)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jan. 23, 2017
Whether Certificate of Need (CON) Application 10457 filed by Sarasota County Public Hospital District (SCPHD), d/b/a Sarasota Memorial Hospital (SMH), seeking approval for a new 90-bed acute care hospital to be located in Venice, Florida, zip code 34275, acute care service district 8, Subdistrict 8-6, on balance, satisfies the applicable statutory and rule review criteria. Whether CON Application 10458 filed by Venice HMA Hospital, LLC, d/b/a Venice Regional Bayfront Health, a/k/a Venice Regional Medical Center (VRMC), seeking approval to replace its existing 312-bed general acute care hospital with a 210-bed hospital to be located near Venice, Florida, in zip code 34292, acute care service district 8, Subdistrict 8-6, on balance, satisfies the applicable statutory and rule review criteria. Whether Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) rule 59C-1.008(4) (Rule) requires a CON application for a general hospital to contain an audited financial statement and, if so, whether the Rule is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority upon which the substantial interests of a party have been determined, in violation of section 120.57(1)(e), Florida Statutes.1/The Sarasota Memorial Hospital and Venice Regional Medical Center CON applications for general hospitals in Sarasota County should both be approved.
17-000557CON  VENICE REGIONAL BAYFRONT HEALTH vs SARASOTA COUNTY PUBLIC HOSPITAL DISTRICT, D/B/A SARASOTA MEMORIAL HOSPITAL AND AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION  (2017)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jan. 23, 2017
Whether Certificate of Need (CON) Application 10457 filed by Sarasota County Public Hospital District (SCPHD), d/b/a Sarasota Memorial Hospital (SMH), seeking approval for a new 90-bed acute care hospital to be located in Venice, Florida, zip code 34275, acute care service district 8, Subdistrict 8-6, on balance, satisfies the applicable statutory and rule review criteria. Whether CON Application 10458 filed by Venice HMA Hospital, LLC, d/b/a Venice Regional Bayfront Health, a/k/a Venice Regional Medical Center (VRMC), seeking approval to replace its existing 312-bed general acute care hospital with a 210-bed hospital to be located near Venice, Florida, in zip code 34292, acute care service district 8, Subdistrict 8-6, on balance, satisfies the applicable statutory and rule review criteria. Whether Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA) rule 59C-1.008(4) (Rule) requires a CON application for a general hospital to contain an audited financial statement and, if so, whether the Rule is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority upon which the substantial interests of a party have been determined, in violation of section 120.57(1)(e), Florida Statutes.1/The Sarasota Memorial Hospital and Venice Regional Medical Center CON applications for general hospitals in Sarasota County should both be approved.
17-003108RX  VENICE HMA HOSPITAL, LLC, D/B/A VENICE REGIONAL BAYFRONT HEALTH vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION  (2017)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 25, 2017
Whether Florida Administrative Code Rule 59C-1.008(4) (Rule) constitutes an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority because it enlarges, modifies, or contravenes the specific provisions of law implemented.Rule 59C-1.008(4)(c) is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority.
17-003348RU  OCALA HERLONG, LLC vs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION  (2017)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 13, 2017
Whether a statement included in the Department of Transportation's 2014 Median Handbook constitutes an unadopted rule, as defined in section 120.52(20), in violation of section 120.54(1)(a).Petitioner demonstrated, by a preponderance of the evidence, that an agency statement was an unadopted rule that violates section 120.54(1)(a).

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