Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
Jack Shreve
Jack Shreve
Visitors: 90
0
Bar #73622(FL)     License for 63 years
Tallahassee FL

Are you Jack Shreve? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

81487, 81716, 81926 and 82196  Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co. v. Deason  (1994)
Supreme Court of Florida Filed: Mar. 10, 1994 Citations: 632 So. 2d 1377
632 So. 2d 1377 (1994) SOUTHERN BELL TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY, Petitioner, v. J. Terry Deason, et al., Respondents. Nos. 81487, 81716, 81926 and 82196. Supreme Court of Florida. March 10, 1994. *1379 Marshall M. Criser, Robert J. Winicki, David M. Wells and William W. Deem, Jacksonville, and Harris R. Anthony and J. Phillip Carver, Mahoney, Adams & Criser, P.A., Tallahassee, Robert G. Beatty, Southern Bell Tel. & Tel. Co., Miami, and J. Robert Fitzgerald and Roger M. Flynt, Jr., Vice Presi..
84-1487  De Molina v. De Molina  (1985)
District Court of Appeal of Florida Filed: Jan. 29, 1985 Citations: 463 So. 2d 405
463 So. 2d 405 (1985) Octavio Gomez DE MOLINA, Appellant, v. Barbara B. DE MOLINA, Appellee. No. 84-1487. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District. January 29, 1985. *406 William John Mason and Jill D. Touby, Miami, for appellant. Broad & Cassel and Harold Bluestein and Laurie L. Rosen, Miami, for appellee. Before BARKDULL, HENDRY and NESBITT, JJ. HENDRY, Judge. Octavio Gomez de Molina appeals from a final order of the trial court adopting the findings of a general master and thereby d..
90-005630RP  CITIZENS OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA vs HEALTHCARE COST CONTAINMENT BOARD  (1990)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 06, 1990
Whether proposed Rule 10N-5.0235(1)(c) and (d), Florida Administrative Code, is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority?Proposed rules governing amendment of budget approved as budget letter not invalid because of failure to require detailed review of amendment.
88-002643  CENTRO ASTURIANO HOSPITAL, INC. vs. HOSPITAL COST CONTAINMENT BOARD  (1988)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Latest Update: Jul. 23, 1990
Whether the Petitioner should be subjected to a penalty pursuant to Section 395.5094, Florida Statutes (1987), or Section 407.51, Florida Statutes (1989)?Penalty imposed by HCCB for excess net revenue per adjusted admissions of hospital.
80-001182  SOUTHERN STATES UTILITIES, INC. vs. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION  (1980)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Latest Update: Jun. 15, 1990
Refund Petitioner's bond and allow Petitioner to submit new tariffs and grant increase in rates.
80-001612  WILLIAM J. CAMPBELL, ET AL. vs. S. E. MORRIS & SONS, INC., AND PUBLIC SERVICE COMPANY  (1980)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Latest Update: Jun. 15, 1990
Whether, and to what extent, Respondent S.E. Morris and Sons, Inc., should be allowed to increase its sewer rates.Petitioners are entitled to increase rates and must investigate going to base facility charge or flat rate within ninety days of Final Order.
80-002192  GENERAL DEVELOPMENT UTILITIES, INC. vs. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION  (1980)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Latest Update: Jun. 15, 1990
Petitioner's service is satisfactory and it may increase its charges. The appropriate rate base and capital base are discussed in the opinion.
81-000258  SOUTHERN STATES UTILITIES, INC. (CITRUS COUNTY) vs. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION  (1981)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Latest Update: Jun. 15, 1990
Petitioner's quality of service is adequate and no adverse effects should arise from its service. Rate increase may be entertained.
81-000259  SOUTHERN STATES UTILITIES, INC. (OSCEOLA COUNTY) vs. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION  (1981)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Latest Update: Jun. 15, 1990
There is no problem with water quality in Petitioner's system, though customers complained about the odor. Recommend allowing rate increase.
81-000311  SOUTHERN STATES UTILITIES, INC. (LAKE COUNTY) vs. PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION  (1981)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Latest Update: Jun. 15, 1990
No adverse effects should accrue to Petitioner for quality of service in determining its right to a rate increase.

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