welcome to elawyers.us
Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change
  1. Home
  2. Find a Lawyer
  8. Hughes Hamilton Rice III
Hughes Hamilton Rice III
Hughes Hamilton Rice III
Visitors: 31
0
Bar #985650(FL)     License for 31 years; Member in Good Standing
Tampa FL

Are you Hughes Hamilton Rice III? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

19-005428N  BRANDI L. JENNINGS AND EVAN M. MABE, ON BEHALF OF AND AS PARENTS AND NATURAL GUARDIANS OF KILLIAN MABE, A MINOR CHILD vs FLORIDA BIRTH-RELATED NEUROLOGICAL INJURY COMPENSATION ASSOCIATION  (2019)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 30, 2019
The issue to determine in this matter is whether the minor child should be awarded compensation under the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Association Plan.The infant sustained a “birth-related neurological injury.” However, obstetrical services were not delivered by a “participating physician” as defined in section 766.302. Therefore, Petitioners’ claim does not meet the requirements for eligibility for com
13-003870N  ASHLEY LAMENDOLA, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PARENT AND LEGAL GUARDIAN OF HER MINOR CHILD, HUNTER LAMENDOLA vs FLORIDA BIRTH-RELATED NEUROLOGICAL INJURY COMPENSATION ASSOCIATION  (2013)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Oct. 03, 2013
The issue in this case is whether notice was accorded the patient, as contemplated by section 766.316, Florida Statutes (2012).Hospital failed to provide notice; physicians provided notice.
13-004646N  JESSICA IBASFALEAN AND CODY IBASFALEAN, INDIVIDUALLY AND AS PARENTS AND NATURAL GUARDIANS OF LANDON IBASFALEAN, A MINOR vs FLORIDA BIRTH-RELATED NEUROLOGICAL INJURY COMPENSATION ASSOCIATION  (2013)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 25, 2013
The issue in this case is whether Landon Ibasfalean suffered an injury for which compensation should be awarded under the Florida Birth-Related Neurological Injury Compensation Plan (Plan).Child is not substantially and permanently mentally and physically impaired.
09-001750N  AURORA BRYANT AND ANTHONE BRYANT, INDIVIDUALY AND AS PARENTS AND NEXT FRIENDS FOR BRAZIL BRYANT, A MINOR vs FLORIDA BIRTH-RELATED NEUROLOGICAL INJURY COMPENSATION ASSOCIATION  (2009)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 03, 2009
Whether Section 766.31(1)(b)1., Florida Statutes, authorizes an award to the parents or legal guardians of a sum not to exceed $100,000, in total, or whether it authorizes an award to the parents or legal guardians of a sum not to exceed $100,000, individually. Whether the Stipulation and Joint Petition for attorney’s fees and expenses filed January 5, 2010, may be approved.The statute authorizes an award to the parents or legal guardians of a sum not to exceed $100,000, in total, and not a sum to exceed $100,000, individually.
94-005742RP  CHARLOTTE COUNTY vs SOUTHWEST FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT  (1994)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Oct. 14, 1994
The primary issue in these consolidated cases is whether the proposed Southern Water Use Caution Area ("SWUCA") rules of the Southwest Florida Water Management District (the "District") constitute an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority. Also at issue in the proceedings is the validity of certain portions of the District's existing water use permitting rules contained in Chapter 40D-2, Florida Administrative Code ("F.A.C."), and the "Basis of Review for Water Use Permit Applications" that the District has adopted by reference in Rule 40D-2.091, F.A.C. Finally, certain policies allegedly utilized by the District in its water use permitting program have been challenged as unpromulgated rules in contravention of Section 120.535, Florida Statutes (1993) ("F.S.").Prop method for calculating min aquifer levels were scientif and statistically sound. Prop method of applying min level was invalid. Existing water use permit rules set forth approp consid but vague. Computer method used as screening tool consti a rule
94-005675EPP  IN RE: FLORIDA POWER AND LIGHT COMPANY, MANATEE ORIMULSION PROJECT, APPLICATION NO. 94-35 vs *  (1994)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Oct. 07, 1994
This proceeding was conducted pursuant to the Florida Electrical Power Plant Siting Act, Section 403, Part II, Florida Statutes (F.S.), to determine whether final certification should be granted for FPL's Manatee Orimulsion Conversion Project (Project), and if certification is granted, what conditions of certification should be imposed.Siting Board remanded for findings on new proposed conditions of site certif. for FPL's proposed Orimulsion conversion projects after District Court vacated Bd's FO denying certification. Additional conditions also were considered. RO: certify project.

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