Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change
Josef M. Fiala
Josef M. Fiala
Visitors: 52
0
Bar #707570(FL)     License for 20 years
North Palm Beach FL

Are you Josef M. Fiala? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

Related Laws :

Florida Laws: 1.01120.569120.57

Florida Administrative Code: 40E-7.301

16-3894  ROBERT EDWARD FRATCHER v. STATE OF FLORIDA  (2018)
District Court of Appeal of Florida Filed: Jan. 18, 2018
DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT ROBERT EDWARD FRATCHER, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. No. 4D16-3894 [January 18, 2018] Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Nineteenth Judicial Circuit, Indian River County; Dan L. Vaughn, Judge; L.T. Case No. 312000CF001746A. Carey Haughwout, Public Defender, and Tatjana Ostapoff, Assistant Public Defender, West Palm Beach, for appellant. Robert Edward Fratcher, Okeechobee, pro se. Pamela Jo Bondi, Attorney General, Ta..
3D08-3092  Mentor v. State  (2010)
District Court of Appeal of Florida Filed: Sep. 15, 2010 Citations: 44 So. 3d 195
44 So. 3d 195 (2010) Jean MENTOR, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. No. 3D08-3092. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District. September 15, 2010. Rehearing Denied September 30, 2010. *196 Carlos J. Martinez, Public Defender, and Amy Weber and Stephen J. Weinbaum, Assistant Public Defenders, for appellant. Bill McCollum, Attorney General, and Rolando A. Soler, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before CORTIÑAS and LAGOA, JJ., and SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge. PER CURIAM. Jea..
09-004996BID  CLOSE CONSTRUCTION, INC. vs SOUTH FLORIDA WATER MANAGEMENT DISTRICT  (2009)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 14, 2009
The issues to be resolved in this proceeding concern whether the Petitioner, Close Construction, Inc. (Petitioner), (Close) was the lowest responsive and responsible bidder in the Request For Bid (RFB) Number 6000000262, whether the subject contract should be awarded to the Petitioner, and, concomitantly, whether the Respondent agency's decision to award the contract to the Intervener, Worth Contracting, Inc. (Worth) was clearly erroneous, contrary to competition, arbitrary or capricious.Petitioner showed that failure to itemize optional cost allowance, by using outdated bid forms, was a "non-judgmental" mistake, did not affect price or give it competitive advantage re: other bidders. Its lowest bid was responsive, and should be accepted.

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