welcome to elawyers.us
Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change
  1. Home
  2. Find a Lawyer
  8. Gerald Seals Livingston
Gerald Seals Livingston
Gerald Seals Livingston
Visitors: 348
0
Bar #112090(FL)     License for 57 years; Member in Good Standing
Mount Dora FL

Are you Gerald Seals Livingston? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

07-000512  LAMAR ADVERTISING COMPANY-LAKELAND vs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION  (2007)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jan. 29, 2007
The issue in this case is whether Petitioner Lamar Advertising Company-Lakeland (Lamar) rebuilt a billboard that it owns on the Florida Turnpike in violation of the law that limits the rebuilding of nonconforming signs.Respondent`s Notice of Intent to Revoke a sign permit should be rescinded because it failed to prove that more than fifty percent of the structural materials in Petitioner`s billboard were replaced within a 24-month period.
06-003282  LAMAR SOUTH FLORIDA vs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION  (2006)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 31, 2006
The issue in this case is whether the Department of Transportation's Notice of Intent to Revoke Sign Permit should be upheld pursuant to Section 479.04, Florida Statutes (2006).1Recommend upholding the Notice of Intent to Revoke Sign Permit.
06-003281  LAMAR SOUTH FLORIDA vs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION  (2006)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 31, 2006
The issue in this case is whether the Department of Transportation's Notice of Intent to Revoke Sign Permit should be upheld pursuant to Section 479.04, Florida Statutes (2006).1Respondent should rescind its Notice of Intent to Revoke Sign Permit.
02-004739  NATIONAL ADVERTISING COMPANY vs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION  (2002)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Dec. 05, 2002
Whether the billboard structure owned by Petitioner, National Advertising Company, located adjacent to U.S. 1/State Road 5, at mile marker 87.5, City of Islamorada Village of Islands, Islamorada, Monroe County, Florida, is in violation of the provisions of Rule 14-10.007, Florida Administrative Code, or Chapter 479, Florida Statutes.Petitioner`s billboard blown down by storm; 50 percent of structural materials not replaced. Billboard not "destroyed" as per Rule.
99-003940  NATIONAL ADVERTISING COMPANY vs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION  (1999)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 20, 1999
The issues in this case are whether six outdoor advertising sign permits previously issued to Petitioner should be reinstated; or, if not, whether new permits should be issued for the six advertising facings (two on each of three sign structures) in Clearwater, Florida.Sign permits cancelled in March 1995 for lack of jurisdiction. Jurisdiction began in November 1995. Signs became illegal under local ordinance on January 19, 1996. Subsequent applications for new permits/reinstatement denied; illegal under ordinance.
99-003941  NATIONAL ADVERTISING COMPANY vs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION  (1999)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 20, 1999
The issues in this case are whether six outdoor advertising sign permits previously issued to Petitioner should be reinstated; or, if not, whether new permits should be issued for the six advertising facings (two on each of three sign structures) in Clearwater, Florida.Sign permits cancelled in March 1995 for lack of jurisdiction. Jurisdiction began in November 1995. Signs became illegal under local ordinance on January 19, 1996. Subsequent applications for new permits/reinstatement denied; illegal under ordinance.
99-003942  NATIONAL ADVERTISING COMPANY vs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION  (1999)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 20, 1999
The issues in this case are whether six outdoor advertising sign permits previously issued to Petitioner should be reinstated; or, if not, whether new permits should be issued for the six advertising facings (two on each of three sign structures) in Clearwater, Florida.Sign permits cancelled in March 1995 for lack of jurisdiction. Jurisdiction began in November 1995. Signs became illegal under local ordinance on January 19, 1996. Subsequent applications for new permits/reinstatement denied; illegal under ordnance.
99-005307  DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION vs NATIONAL ADVERTISING COMPANY  (1999)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Dec. 16, 1999
The three major issues for consideration in this hearing are whether the sign structure in issue has been moved or removed from the location for which it was permitted and improperly re- erected; whether the sign in issue is being operated and maintained without the required proper state permits; and whether the sign in issue is a conforming or nonconforming structure.Sign company`s failure to place its sign at the spot for which it was permitted made it illegal and required a permit to move; it must be removed.
99-005308  DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION vs NATIONAL ADVERTISING COMPANY  (1999)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Dec. 16, 1999
The three major issues for consideration in this hearing are whether the sign structure in issue has been moved or removed from the location for which it was permitted and improperly re- erected; whether the sign in issue is being operated and maintained without the required proper state permits; and whether the sign in issue is a conforming or nonconforming structure.Sign company`s failure to place its sign at the spot for which it was permitted made it illegal and required a permit to move; it must be removed.
99-005309  DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION vs NATIONAL ADVERTISING COMPANY  (1999)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Dec. 16, 1999
The three major issues for consideration in this hearing are whether the sign structure in issue has been moved or removed from the location for which it was permitted and improperly re- erected; whether the sign in issue is being operated and maintained without the required proper state permits; and whether the sign in issue is a conforming or nonconforming structure.Sign company`s failure to place its sign at the spot for which it was permitted made it illegal and required a permit to move; it must be removed.

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