welcome to elawyers.us
Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
  1. Home
  2. Find a Lawyer
  6. George F Indest, III
George F Indest, III
George F Indest, III
Visitors: 238
2
Bar #382426(FL)     License for 42 years; Member in Good Standing
Altamonte Springs FL

Are you George F Indest, III? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

08-003510RX  ANAND NARAYANAN vs BOARD OF PHARMACY  (2008)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 21, 2008
The issues in this case are the amount of attorney’s fees and costs to be awarded to Petitioners pursuant to Section 120.595, Florida Statutes (2007);1 whether Petitioners are entitled to fees and costs pursuant to Subsections 57.105(5), 120.569(2)(e), and 120.595(4), Florida Statutes; and, if so, what amount should be awarded.Fourteen Petitioners, who filed separate rule challenges with identical issues, were not entitled to the statutory limit of fees for each petition. The fees were awarded as if one petition was filed.
08-002728RX  VIPUL PATEL vs BOARD OF PHARMACY  (2008)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 09, 2008
The issues in this case are the amount of attorney’s fees and costs to be awarded to Petitioners pursuant to Section 120.595, Florida Statutes (2007);1 whether Petitioners are entitled to fees and costs pursuant to Subsections 57.105(5), 120.569(2)(e), and 120.595(4), Florida Statutes; and, if so, what amount should be awarded.Fourteen Petitioners, who filed separate rule challenges with identical issues, were not entitled to the statutory limit of fees for each petition. The fees were awarded as if one petition was filed.
08-002729RX  MIRIAM L. HERNANDEZ vs BOARD OF PHARMACY  (2008)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 10, 2008
The issues in this case are the amount of attorney’s fees and costs to be awarded to Petitioners pursuant to Section 120.595, Florida Statutes (2007);1 whether Petitioners are entitled to fees and costs pursuant to Subsections 57.105(5), 120.569(2)(e), and 120.595(4), Florida Statutes; and, if so, what amount should be awarded.Fourteen Petitioners, who filed separate rule challenges with identical issues, were not entitled to the statutory limit of fees for each petition. The fees were awarded as if one petition was filed.
08-002730RX  MIRLEY ALEMAN-ALEJO vs BOARD OF PHARMACY  (2008)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 10, 2008
The issues in this case are the amount of attorney’s fees and costs to be awarded to Petitioners pursuant to Section 120.595, Florida Statutes (2007);1 whether Petitioners are entitled to fees and costs pursuant to Subsections 57.105(5), 120.569(2)(e), and 120.595(4), Florida Statutes; and, if so, what amount should be awarded.Fourteen Petitioners, who filed separate rule challenges with identical issues, were not entitled to the statutory limit of fees for each petition. The fees were awarded as if one petition was filed.
08-002731RX  VALLIAMMAI NATARAJAN vs BOARD OF PHARMACY  (2008)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 10, 2008
The issues in this case are the amount of attorney’s fees and costs to be awarded to Petitioners pursuant to Section 120.595, Florida Statutes (2007);1 whether Petitioners are entitled to fees and costs pursuant to Subsections 57.105(5), 120.569(2)(e), and 120.595(4), Florida Statutes; and, if so, what amount should be awarded.Fourteen Petitioners, who filed separate rule challenges with identical issues, were not entitled to the statutory limit of fees for each petition. The fees were awarded as if one petition was filed.
08-002732RX  JOHN H. NEAMATALLA vs BOARD OF PHARMACY  (2008)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 10, 2008
The issues in this case are the amount of attorney’s fees and costs to be awarded to Petitioners pursuant to Section 120.595, Florida Statutes (2007);1 whether Petitioners are entitled to fees and costs pursuant to Subsections 57.105(5), 120.569(2)(e), and 120.595(4), Florida Statutes; and, if so, what amount should be awarded.Fourteen Petitioners, who filed separate rule challenges with identical issues, were not entitled to the statutory limit of fees for each petition. The fees were awarded as if one petition was filed.
06-004565F  SARA FRENCH AND GAIL FRENCH vs AGENCY FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES  (2006)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 12, 2008
The issue is whether Petitioners are entitled to an award of attorney’s fees, costs, and/or interest related to the hearing officer’s award of corrective payments on remand after the decision in French v. Department of Children and Families, 920 So. 2d 671 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006).Petitioners did not prevail in the remand proceeding and are not entitled to attorney`s fees.The Division has no authority to award interest on or as part of corrective payments ordered on remand. Neither party is entitled to attorney`s fees in this case.
04-002978  MEDNET CONNECT, INC.; ASPEN ADMINISTRATORS; AND FLORIDA GOLD CITRUS, INC. vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION  (2004)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 20, 2004
The issues in this case are: (1) whether the Agency for Health Care Administration (Agency) properly determined that Petitioners should reimburse South Bay Hospital 60 percent of the amount charged for the outpatient surgery performed on a workers' compensation claimant; (2) whether the charges were undocumented, excessive, erroneous, incorrect, and/or duplicative; (3) whether the Agency complied with applicable rules in making its decision; (4) whether the employee who made the determination for the Agency had been delegated the authority to do so; and (5) whether the Agency has adopted guidelines and procedures for its employees to follow in making decisions in reimbursement disputes decided under Section 440.13, Florida Statutes (2003).1Respondent failed to establish any objective basis for its determination that the charges billed by the hospital accurately reflected the cost of the services by the health care provider. The amount due by the carrier cannot be based on that amount.
06-001557FC  SARAH FRENCH vs AGENCY FOR PERSONS WITH DISABILITIES  (2006)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 01, 2005
The issues are (1) the amount of attorney’s fees and costs that Respondent must pay to Petitioner for the appeal in French v. Department of Children and Families, 920 So. 2d 671 (Fla. 5th DCA 2006), and (2) Petitioner’s entitlement to an award of attorney’s fees and costs in the proceeding that gave rise to the appeal.The record reflects that the parties reached an agreement to settle this case. The case is closed pursuant to Section 120.57(4), Florida Statutes.
03-002560  AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION vs GUARDIAN CARE, INC., D/B/A GUARDIAN CARE CONVALESCENT CENTER  (2003)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 15, 2003
Whether Respondent failed to protect one of the residents of its facility from sexual coercion. Whether Respondent failed to report the alleged violation immediately to the administrator.Respondent failed to prove that the nursing home committed a Class II violation. The alleged victim was not a vulnerable adult and the nursing home was in substantial compliance with reporting requirements. Recommend dismissal.

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