905 So. 2d 217 (2005) Silvio Andres PADILLA, Appellant, v. The STATE of Florida, Appellee. No. 3D05-424. District Court of Appeal of Florida, Third District. May 11, 2005. *218 Silvio Andres Padilla, in proper person. Charles J. Crist, Jr., Attorney General, and Robin F. Hazel, Assistant Attorney General, for appellee. Before CORTIÑAS and ROTHENBERG, JJ., and SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge. ROTHENBERG, Judge. The defendant, Silvio Padilla ("Padilla"), was charged in count I with lewd fondling, a second d..
Whether Respondent, a health studio, provided its members a facility of equal quality, within five driving miles, at no extra cost, when Respondent's business ceased operations in February, 1995.Health studio to which memberships of defunct health studio were transferred were not of equal quality.
The issue in this case is whether Respondents committed the offenses described in an Administrative Complaint entered by Petitioner on or about January 10, 1997.Respondent failed to use invoice required by Section 559.911, Florida Statutes. Evidence failed to prove Respondent did not use repair estimate required by Section 559.905, Florida Statutes.
The issue in this case is whether Petitioner lacks good moral character in violation of Section 539.001(4)(a)1., Florida Statutes (Supp. 1996). 1/Agency action in the form of application denial was in substance refusal to renew and agency failed to prove basis of refusal.
As to Case No. 96-5539, whether the Respondent, Dynotech Automotive, Inc., committed the violations alleged in the administrative complaint dated October 22, 1996; and, if so, what penalty should be imposed. As to Case No. 96-5463, whether Supertech Automotive, Inc. (the alleged successor to Dynotech) is entitled to registration as a motor vehicle repair shop under the provisions of Section 559.904, Florida Statutes.Motor vehicle repair shop committed numerous acts constituting fraud, such that successor with same manager not entitled to registration.
The issues for determination in this case are: 1) whether Respondent, VALHOLLOW ENTERPRISES, INC., d/b/a CELEBRITY BALLROOM, violated the provisions of the Florida Dance Studio Act, Sections 501.143 et seq., Florida Statutes; 2) whether Petitioner, JOHN PROCIDA, sustained compensable injury as the result of such violations; and 3) whether the proceeds of a guaranty agreement secured by a $15,000 certificate of deposit which was posted by Respondent should be disbursed by the DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE AND CONSUMER AFFAIRS to Petitioner JOHN PROCIDA for injuries sustained.Dance studio violated contract requirements. Customer entitled to full refund of security deposit.
Are the allegations of the Administrative Complaint true, and if so, what penalty should be imposed?Sufficient evidence to establish facts to show violation of motor vehicle repair act Sections 559.901 - 559.9221 F.S. Revoke registration.
Whether Petitioner has standing to challenge the action the Department of Agriculture and Consumer Services (Agency), in its May 17, 1995, letter to counsel for Petitioner, has proposed to take with respect to the proceeds of the performance bonds Petitioner has posted with the Agency?Seller of travel lacked standing to challenge DACS decision to distribute to claimants performance bond proceeds DACS had already received from surety.
Whether the respondent is guilty of the violations alleged in the Notice of Intent to Impose Administrative Fine, and, if so, the amount of the fine which should be imposed.Administrative fine of $100 recommended for gym which operated without being registered per 501.015(1). Maximum fine "per violation" not "per day".
Whether Respondent is operating a motor vehicle repair shop without being registered with Petitioner, in violation of Section 559.904, Florida Statutes, and is subject to an administrative fine.Respondent operating motor vehicle repair shop without registering with Department; fine.
