Leon FL Lawyers | Douglas Dell Dolan -- eLawyers

Douglas Dell Dolan

Visitors: 52

Bar #11121(FL) License for 19 years

Tallahassee FL

Are you Douglas Dell Dolan? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

Florida Administrative Code: 14-96.011, 14-96.015, 28-106.109, 28-106.203, 28-106.211, 28-106.217, 69L-6.019, 69L-6.021, 69L-6.025, 69L-6.027, 69L-6.028, 69L-6.030, 69L-6.031, 69L-6.035

15-005003 TONY L. PHILLIPS vs DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, CONSTRUCTION INDUSTRY LICENSING BOARD (2015)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 09, 2015

Whether Petitioner’s application for a certified building contractor’s license should be granted, and whether Respondent relied upon an unadopted rule in formulating its intended decision to deny Petitioner’s application, in violation of section 120.57(1)(e), Florida Statutes (2015).1/Petitioner failed to prove by a preponderance of the evidence either that his application for certified building contractor's license should be approved or that the Board relied on unadopted rules in denying his application.

11-003278PL DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF INSURANCE AGENTS AND AGENCY SERVICES vs FREDDIE WILSON (2011)

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

The issues in this case are whether Respondent violated sections 648.442(1), 648.442(2), 648.442(4), 648.571(1), 648.45(2)(e), 648.45(2)(h), 648.45(2)(j), 648.571(3)(b)1., and 648.571(3)(b)2., Florida Statutes (2007),1/ and Florida Administrative Code Rules 69B-221.145(4)(a) and 69B- 221.145(4)(b), and, if so, what discipline should be imposed.Bail Bond agent charged credit card fee on premium, charged unlawful amount for credit card fee on collateral, and failed to give receipt for collateral.

11-000714PL DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES vs YURAY RODRIGUEZ (2011)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Feb. 10, 2011

The issues in this case are whether Respondent committed the allegations contained in the Second Amended Administrative Complaint, and if so, the penalty that should be imposed.Petitioner failed to demonstrate by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent violated sections 626.611(7) & (8), 626.621(6), and 626.9541, Florida Statutes. Recommend dismissal of Second Amended Administrative Complaint.

09-004991 DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION vs A AND M PAINTING SERVICES, INC. (2009)

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

The issue in the case is whether A and M Painting Services, Inc., (Respondent), should be assessed a penalty for an alleged failure to comply with workers' compensation requirements as alleged in the Second Amended Order of Penalty Assessment.Identification of Respondent's personnel as painters was correct. Penalty assessment was proper.

09-004936 DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION vs WESTSIDE MASONRY CONTRACTORS, INC. (2009)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 10, 2009

The issue is whether Respondent is liable for a penalty of $286,400.01 for the alleged failure to maintain workers’ compensation insurance for its employees in violation of Subsection 440.107(7)(d), Florida Statutes (2008).1Respondent maintained inadequate coverage on 54 employees and owes $286.400.01

09-003912 DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION vs COUNTYWIDE SIDING AND WINDOWS, INC. (2009)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 21, 2009

The issues in this matter are whether Countrywide Siding and Windows, Inc., failed to secure workers compensation that meets the requirements of Chapter 440, Florida Statutes, and, if so was correctly assessed a penalty for violating, the workers’ compensation laws of Florida.The evidence did not show that Respondent failed to secure Workers' Compensation insurance for employees from leasing company when no one from leasing company testified and lease contract not introduced into evidence.

09-003484 DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION vs DTS, LLC (2009)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 24, 2009

The issues to be resolved in this proceeding concern whether the Respondent, P.A.T. Auto Transport, Inc., committed the violations alleged in the relevant Stop-Work Order and the Fourth Amended Order of Penalty Assessment, and, if so, what, if any, penalty is warranted.Petitioner failed to prove that drivers were employees; they were independant contractors. Therefore, Respondent was compliant with coverage statute and no penalty.

09-003486 DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION vs P.A.T. AUTO TRANSPORT, INC. (2009)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 24, 2009

09-006594 DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION vs NOBEL VAN LINES, INC. (2009)

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

The issue is whether Petitioner properly issued a Stop Work Order (SWO) and Second Amended Penalty Assessment against Respondent for failing to obtain workers' compensation insurance that meets the requirements of Chapter 440, Florida Statutes.Petitioner properly issued a Stop-Work Order and Second Amended Penalty Assessment against Respondent for failing to obtain workers' compensation insurance that meets the requirements of Chapter 440, Florida Statutes.

09-003815 DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION vs JURGENSON TRADING CORP. (2009)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 17, 2009

The issue in this case is whether Respondent failed to provide workers' compensation insurance coverage for employees and, if so, what penalty should be assessed.Absent provision for retroactive exclusion of officers or other mitigating circumstances, Respondent owes penalty assessed for not having workers' compensation insurance.