Leon FL Lawyers | Joseph Monroe Helton Jr. -- eLawyers

16-002583PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, REAL ESTATE APPRAISAL BOARD vs JASON DWIGHT WALKER (2016)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 10, 2016

Whether Respondent, Jason Dwight Walker, prepared a preconstruction appraisal report that was in violation of the Uniform Standards of Professional Appraisal Practice (USPAP), and thus section 475.624(4), Florida Statutes, and Florida Administrative Code Rule 61J1-9.001, as alleged in the First Amended Administrative Complaint and, if so, the sanctions to be imposed.Petitioner failed to prove by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent violated the standards for conducting an appraisal as alleged in the First Amended Administrative Complaint, which should, therefore, be dismissed.

11-005796RU FLORIDA QUARTER HORSE RACING ASSOCIATION, INC.; FLORIDA QUARTER HORSE BREEDERS AND OWNERS ASSOCIATION, INC.; AND GERALD KEESLING vs DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF PARI-MUTUEL WAGERING (2011)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 10, 2011

Whether Respondent's policy of treating "Gretna-style" barrel match racing as the legal equivalent of traditional quarter horse racing, i.e., a legitimate pari-mutuel wagering event for which a quarter horse racing permitholder can obtain an annual operating license, constitutes an agency statement of general applicability that implements, interprets, or prescribes law or policy in violation of section 120.54(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2012).1Division's policy of treating barrel racing as the legal equivalent of quarter horse racing is an unadopted rule.

13-002780F AMERICAN AMATEUR MIXED MARTIAL ARTS, INC., A/K/A UNITED STATES AMATEUR MIXED MARTIAL ARTS, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, STATE BOXING COMMISSION (2013)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 23, 2013

Whether the Petitioner, American Amateur Mixed Martial Arts, (AAMMA or Petitioner) is entitled to an award of attorney’s fees and costs pursuant to section 57.111, Florida Statutes.Evidence demonstrated that the agency was substantially justified in initiating administrative action. Attorney's fees and costs are denied.

10-004229PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF PARI-MUTUEL WAGERING vs MANUEL J. CRIOLLO (2010)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 29, 2010

The issues are whether Respondent violated section 550.2415(1)(a), Florida Statutes, and if so, what penalty should be imposed.Pursuant to the absolute insurer rule, Respondent is guilty of violating section 550.2415(1)(a), where caffeine and oxilofrine were detected in post-race blood and urine samples. Recommend 30-day suspension and $500 fine.

11-001075RX INTERBLOCK USA, LLC vs DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF PARI-MUTUEL WAGERING (2011)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Feb. 28, 2011

The issue is whether the word, "internal," in Florida Administrative Code Rule 61D-14.041(1) is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority because Respondent exceeded its grant of rulemaking authority or because this word enlarges, modifies, or contravenes the law implemented, in violation of sections 120.56(3) and 120.52(8)(b) and (c). In sum, Petitioner and Intervenor challenge rule 61D-14.041(1) only to the extent that this rule requires that each slot machine contain an internal random number generator.Adoption of word, "internal," to require an internal random number generator in each slot machine, as required by rule 61D-14.041(1), is invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority due to lack of authority and contravention of law implemented.

11-001578PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF PARI-MUTUEL WAGERING vs RICHARD ALVES (2011)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 28, 2011

Whether Respondents have violated the provisions of section 550.2415(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2010), and if so, what penalty should be imposed?Respondents violated section 550.2415. Although Respondents were not able to supervise animals pre-race, the absolute insurer rule mandates finding violations of the statute.

11-001579PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF PARI-MUTUEL WAGERING vs CASEY ALVES (2011)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 28, 2011

Whether Respondents have violated the provisions of section 550.2415(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2010), and if so, what penalty should be imposed?Respondents violated section 550.2415. Although Respondents were not able to supervise animals pre-race, the absolute insurer rule mandates finding violations of the statute.

07-005686PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF PARI-MUTUEL WAGERING vs FRANK D. INSERRA (2007)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Dec. 17, 2007

The issues in this case are whether Respondent, Frank D. Inserra, violated Section 550.105(7), Florida Statutes (2007), as alleged in Count I of an Amended Administrative Complaint issued by Petitioner, the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering, on October 15, 2007, and, if so, what disciplinary action should be taken against his Florida pari-mutuel wagering occupational license.Respondent incurred unpaid obligation directly related to the sport of racing being conducted at a pari-mutuel facility in Florida.

08-004501PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF PARI-MUTUEL WAGERING vs CLIVALEE MUNDLE (2008)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 16, 2008

The issue presented is whether Respondent is guilty of the allegations in the Administrative Complaint filed against him, and, if so, what disciplinary action should be taken against him, if any.Recommend exclusion from all slot machine facilities in this state and ineligibility for re-licensure for slot machine occupational license holder who converted casino revenue to his own use on several occasions.

07-001857RX FLORIDA FINE WINE AND SPIRITS, LLC, D/B/A TOTAL WINE AND MORE vs DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION (2007)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 25, 2007

The issues in this case are whether Florida Administrative Code Rule 61A-1.0101/ is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority, and whether the 1997 repeal of Rule 61A-4.058 was an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority.Petitioner was barred from challenging the 1997 repeal of Florida Administrative Code Rule 61A-4.058 because its challenge was untimely. Petitioner did not prove that Rule 61A-1.010 was an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority.

Joseph Monroe Helton Jr.