Lake FL Lawyers | Donna Christine Lindamood -- eLawyers

Donna Christine Lindamood

Visitors: 80

407-395-9162

Bar #273694(FL)

Clermont FL

Are you Donna Christine Lindamood? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

Related Laws :

USC: 18 U. S. C. 1001

Florida Laws: 120.569, 120.57, 120.60, 120.68, 20.165, 455.225, 455.227, 455.2273, 458.331, 474.214, 475.021, 475.25, 475.42, 475.611, 475.613, 475.622, 475.624, 475.628, 475.629, 475.6295, 57.111, 627.4085, 627.8405

Florida Administrative Code: 61J1-1.008, 61J1-8.002

09-002491PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs MIGUEL A. MURCIANO (2009)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 13, 2009

Whether Respondent committed the violations alleged in the Amended Administrative Complaint issued against him and, if so, what penalty should be imposed.Clear and convincing evidence established that Respondent committed the statutory and USPAP violations lleged in the Amended Administrative Complaint. Recommend license revocation.

08-004720PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs ELBERT CECIL WRIGHT, III (2008)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 22, 2008

The issue presented is whether Respondent is guilty of the allegations contained in the Administrative Complaint filed against him, and, if so, what disciplinary action should be taken against him, if any.Dismissal of administrative complaint due to Petitioner`s failure to prove allegations by clear and convincing evidence. Respondent`s appraisal was based upon correct methodology and reasonable comparables, not misleading, and in compliance with USPAP.

08-004616PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs FRANK LAPLATTE (2008)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 19, 2008

The issues in this case are whether the allegations of the Amended Administrative Complaint are correct, and, if so, what penalty should be imposed.Violation of professional standards in real estate warrants suspension, fine, probation, and educaiton.

07-005266PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs HOWARD KLAHR (2007)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 19, 2007

Whether Respondent committed the violations alleged in the Administrative Complaint issued against him and, if so, what penalty should be imposed.The proof was insufficient to establish that Respondent failed to exercise reasonable diligence in completing the appraisal; the proof was also insufficient to establish that he failed to communicate the appraisal without good cause.

06-003666PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs SIDNEY J. WHITE (2006)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 25, 2006

Whether Respondent acted as a broker or sales associate without being the holder of a valid and current broker or sales associate license, in violation of Subsection 475.42(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2004),1 and, therefore, in violation of Subsection 475.25(1)(e), Florida Statutes; and Whether Respondent published or caused to be published an advertisement for the sale of real properties, advertising himself to be a broker, at the time Respondent's license was in inactive status for failure to renew, in violation of Subsection 475.25(1)(c), Florida Statutes, and Florida Administrative Code Rule 61J2-10.025.Petitioner proved that Respondent, while on inactive status because of his non-renewal of his sales associate license, published an ad and represented himself as licensed. Recommend suspension of his license.

00-003024PL DEPARTMENT OF BANKING AND FINANCE, DIVISION OF SECURITIES AND INVESTOR PROTECTION vs LARRY STEVEN KASE (2000)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 24, 2000

The issue is whether Respondent is guilty of a failure to discharge adequately his compliance and supervisory responsibilities, in connection with the churning of a securities account by an account representative, and, if so, what penalty should be imposed.Petitioner failed to prove that Respondent, who was not a shareholder, officer, director, or employee of brokerage firm, had any compliance or supervision responsibilities over registered representative who was churning an account.

99-003729 DEPARTMENT OF BANKING AND FINANCE, DIVISION OF FINANCE vs BLACKSTONE MORTGAGE COMPANY AND TERESA M. STEININGER (1999)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 01, 1999

The issues in this case are whether Respondent violated Sections 494.0043(1)(b), 494.0038(1)(a) and (b)1, and 494.0038(2)(a), Florida Statutes (1997), by failing to provide a mortgagee's title insurance policy; by obtaining a mortgage broker fee without a written agreement; and by failing to disclose the receipt of rates, points, or fees on behalf of a lender; and, if so, what, if any, penalty should be imposed. (All chapter and section references are to Florida Statutes (1997) unless otherwise stated.)Mortgage broker who failed to properly document loans is guilty of violating Sections 494.0038 and 494.0043, Florida Statutes, and should be reprimanded and fined $2,426.25.

08-002026PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs SALVATORE ANTHONY ROMANO (2008)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 22, 2008

09-001259PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs ROMY STEINBERG (2009)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 11, 2009

09-001682PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs DAVID WITTIG (2009)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 01, 2009