Leon FL Administrative law and Health care Lawyers | Kelly A -- eLawyers

Bankruptcy No. 89-5103-8B1 Matter of Visiting Nurse Ass'n of Tampa Bay, Inc. (1991)

United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida Filed: Jul. 17, 1991 Citations: 128 B.R. 835

128 B.R. 835 (1991) In the Matter of VISITING NURSE ASSOCIATION OF TAMPA BAY, INC., further d/b/a VNA of Tampa Bay, Debtors. Bankruptcy No. 89-5103-8B1. United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division. July 17, 1991. Richard C. Prosser, Tampa, Fla., E. Michael Flanagan, Special Counsel, for debtor. Roberta A. Colton, Tampa, Fla., for Judith M. Travis. Catherine Peek McEwen, Tampa, Fla., for Transworld Center Associates, Ltd. Thomas B. Mimms, Jr., Tampa, Fla., for First Florida Bank. ..

09-005214 APOLLO HEALTH AND REHABILITATION CENTER vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (2009)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 22, 2009

The issue in the case is whether the Agency for Health Care Administration (Respondent) used the correct nursing home bed capacity in calculating the Medicaid per diem rate for Apollo Health and Rehabilitation Center (Petitioner) for the rate period beginning July 1, 2009.Correct identification of nursing home beds requires amendment to reimbursement rate.

08-002084RP FLORIDA HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATION, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION NOT FOR PROFIT, AND FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF HOMES AND SERVICES FOR THE AGING, INC., A FLORIDA CORPORATION NOT FOR PROFIT vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (2008)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 24, 2008

Whether proposed Rule 59G-6.0102 is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority pursuant to Section 120.52(8), Florida Statutes,1/ for the reasons described by Petitioners in their Petition.The allegations are not appropriate in the context of a facial attack on the proposed rule. Notwithstanding, the rule is valid on its face.

08-002566BID HEALTH MANAGEMENT SYSTEMS, INC. vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (2008)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 23, 2008

The issue in this case is whether Respondent’s proposed contract award for the Medicaid Third Party Liability Program, AHCA ITN 0805, is contrary to Respondent’s governing statutes, Respondent’s rules or policies, or the solicitation specifications.Respondent`s proposed contract award pursuant to an invitation to negotiate was not contrary to the Agency for Health Care Administration`s policies or rules or the invitation to negotiate.

02-001400BID FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF MEDICAL EQUIPMENT SERVICES vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (2002)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 08, 2002

The dispute in this case arises from various policy decisions of Respondent that underlie and inform a request for proposals that Respondent has issued for the purchase, through competitive bidding, of durable medical equipment and related services. The ultimate issue is whether Respondent’s decisions in connection with the competitive bidding process at the heart of this controversy have complied with state and federal law governing the Medicaid program.Respondent`s failure to obtain federal approval of a competitive bidding process that affects the Medicaid program requires that the procurements be held in abeyance after federal approval has been granted.

02-001314RU FLORIDA ASSOCIATION OF MEDICAL EQUIPMENT SERVICES vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (2002)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 02, 2002

The dispute in this case arises from various policy decisions of Respondent that underlie and inform a request for proposals that Respondent has issued for the purchase, through competitive bidding, of durable medical equipment and related services. The ultimate issue is whether Respondent’s decisions in connection with the competitive bidding process at the heart of this controversy have complied with state and federal law governing the Medicaid program.Respondent`s failure to obtain federal approval of a competitive bidding process that affects the Medicaid program requires that the procurements be held in abeyance after federal approval has been granted.

01-002153MPI LIFELINE PHARMACY, INC. vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (2001)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 01, 2001

Whether Petitioner is liable to Respondent for Medicaid overpayments, fines, interests, and costs, pursuant to the Agency’s Final Agency Audit Letter of May 2, 2001 (hereinafter FAAL), in the amount of $194,526.97.Petitioner challenged the agency`s pharmacy Medicaid overpayments allegations; must repay recalculated monetary sanctions plus interest.

01-001929 COLONNADE MEDICAL CENTER (GOLD COAST HEALTH CENTER, INC., D/B/A COLONNADE MEDICAL CENTER) vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (2001)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 17, 2001

Whether the subject supplemental Medicaid payments to Petitioner for services to patients with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) during the audit period January 1, 1999 through June 20, 2001, constitute overpayments. Whether Respondent has the authority to recoup such overpayments. If such authority is found, whether the doctrine of unjust enrichment should be applied to prevent Respondent's recouping any overpayment under the facts of this proceeding.Agency has authority to recoup overpayments resulting from provider`s failure to comply with billing requirements.

01-002858BID PUBLIC CONSULTING GROUP, INC. vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (2001)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 19, 2001

The issue is whether Respondent's tentative award of a contract to Intervenor for Medicaid third party liability services was consistent with the applicable statutes, rule, and policies "that govern the award of government contracts," and the request for proposals.Petitioner failed to prove that scoring was clearly erroneous; that evaluators were unqualified; and that agency`s determination that Intervenor`s proposal was responsive was clearly erroneous.

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.

Kelly Ann Bennett