Lake FL Lawyers | Donna Christine Lindamood -- eLawyers

Donna Christine Lindamood

Visitors: 71

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

11-001084PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs RONALD C. HORMES (2011)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Feb. 28, 2011

The issue in this case is stated in three counts set forth the Administrative Complaint1/: Count I, whether Respondent, Ronald C. Hormes ("Hormes"), is guilty of violating section 475.624(15), Florida Statutes (2008),2/ by failing to exercise reasonable diligence when preparing or developing an appraisal report; Count IV, whether Hormes is guilty of obstructing an investigation in violation of section 475.626(1)(f); and Count V, whether Hormes is guilty of failing to properly and adequately supervise a registered trainee appraiser in violation of section 475.624(4); and Florida Administrative Code Rule 61J1-4.010.The agency proved one of three counts by clear and convincing evidence; recommend penalty of $1,000 and two years' probation.

11-005638PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs GERALD ROWLEY (2011)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 02, 2011

10-009926PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs VICTOR JESUS MONZON (2010)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Oct. 27, 2010

Whether Victor Jesus Monzon (Respondent) committed the violations alleged in the subject Administrative Complaint, and, if so, the penalties that should be imposed.Appraiser is not guilty of the alleged misconduct.

10-010914PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs RONALD C. HORMES (2010)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Dec. 27, 2010

The issues in this case are whether Respondent violated sections 475.622(1), 475.622(2), 475.624(2), and 475.624(15), Florida Statutes (2007),1/ and Florida Administrative Code Rule 61J1-7.001(2), and, if so, what discipline should be imposed.Appraiser failed to use the correct designation when signing an appraisal and incompetently prepared an appraisal.

09-006338F ELBERT CECIL WRIGHT, III vs DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE (2009)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 16, 2009

The issue presented is whether Petitioner is entitled to recover from Respondent his attorney's fees and costs, pursuant to the Florida Equal Access to Justice Act, Section 57.111, Florida Statutes.Petitioner was entitled to be reimbursed for his attorney's fees and costs defending the underlying action which was initiated against him with no factual or legal basis.

10-001098PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs FRANCIS J. COLEMAN (2010)

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

The issues in this case are whether Respondent violated Subsections 475.624(15), Florida Statutes (2006),1 and, if so, what discipline should be imposed.Appraiser used an inappropriate property as a comparable when using the sales comparison method in valuating the property at issue.

10-000267PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs PETER JOSEPH ESPOSITO (2010)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jan. 19, 2010

The issues in this case are stated in two counts set forth in the Administrative Complaint: Count I--whether Respondent is guilty of fraud, misrepresentation, concealment, false promises, false pretenses, dishonest conduct, culpable negligence, or breach of trust in a business transaction in violation of Subsection 475.624(2), Florida Statutes (2006); and Count II-- whether Respondent is guilty of failing to exercise reasonable diligence in developing an appraisal report in violation of Subsection 475.624(15), Florida Statutes (2006). Counts III through IX of the Administrative Complaint were dismissed on the day of the final hearing held in this matter.The Department could not establish by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent was in violation of statutes.

09-005890PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs ARIF ZAHEER AND VISTA HORIZON REALTY, INC. (2009)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Oct. 26, 2009

The issues in this case are whether Respondents, Arif Zaheer and Vista Horizon Realty, Inc., violated Subsections 475.25(1)(b), 475.25(1)(d)1., 475.25(1)(e), and 475.25(1)(k), Florida Statutes (2007),1 and Florida Administrative Code Rule 61J2-14.011; whether Respondent Arif Zaheer violated Subsection 455.227(1)(n), Florida Statutes, and Florida Administrative Code Rule 61J2-14.009; and, if so, what discipline should be imposed.Respondents received funds from clients for a downpayment on commercial property. Not all the funds were placed in escrow, and some of the funds were not returned to clients when requested.

09-003685PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs HARVEY W. SIGMOND (2009)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 13, 2009

The issues in this case are whether Respondent violated Subsections 475.624(2), 475.624(14), and 475.624(15), Florida Statutes (2005),1 and, if so, what discipline should be imposed.Respondent failed to sufficiently analyze a previous sale of the property he was appraising.

09-004043PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs RAQUEL TORAL (2009)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 29, 2009

Whether Respondent committed the violations alleged in the Administrative Complaint in the manner specified therein and, if so, what penalty should be imposed.Petitioner failed to meet its burden of proving that residential appraiser, who appraised a single-family residence within which an ALF operated, committed, in connection with the appraisal, the violations alleged in the Administrative Complaint.