Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change
Leon Victor Melnicoff
Leon Victor Melnicoff
Visitors: 87
0
Bar #119559(FL)     License for 9 years
Tallahassee FL

Are you Leon Victor Melnicoff? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

19-006006  DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION vs EAST COAST SHUTTERS, INC.  (2019)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 12, 2019
Whether Respondent, East Coast Shutters, Inc. (“East Coast”), timely requested a hearing to contest the Second Amended Order of Penalty Assessment, issued by Petitioner, Department of Financial Services, Division of Workers’ Compensation (“Division”).Respondent's late-filed Petition for Administrative Hearing was not excused due to equitable tolling.
19-005908  DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION vs YFRAIN ESPINOSA  (2019)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 06, 2019
The issue is whether Respondent has any documented permanent physical restrictions related to a compensable injury, so as to require Petitioner to refer Respondent for a vocational evaluation, as provided in Florida Administrative Code Rule 69L-22.006(11)(b).Injured employee not entitled to vocational evaluation because he failed to document--i.e., prove--permanent physical restrictions from compensable injuries.
19-005848  DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION vs JAMES COLLIGAN FENCE, LLC  (2019)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 04, 2019
The issues to be determined are whether Respondent failed to provide workers’ compensation insurance as required by section 440.107, Florida Statutes (2019), and if so, what penalty should be imposed.Petitioner proved that Respondent did not provide workers' compensation coverage or hold a valid exemption. Income was properly imputed to calculate the penalty.
19-003961  DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION vs TARPON LIQUORS LLC  (2019)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 23, 2019
Did Respondent, Tarpon Liquors LLC (Tarpon Liquors), timely request a hearing to contest the Amended Order of Penalty Assessment issued by Petitioner, Department of Financial Services, Division of Workers' Compensation (Division)?Tarpon Liquors proved its representative did not sign certified mail receipt for Amended Order of Penalty Assessment. Receipt only creates rebuttable presumption. Consequently, hearing request was timely.
19-001238  DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION vs FORGUE GENERAL CONTRACTING, INC.  (2019)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 11, 2019
Whether Respondent, Forgue General Contracting, Inc., violated the provisions of chapter 440, Florida Statutes, by failing to secure the payment of workers’ compensation coverage; and, if so, what penalty is appropriate.The Department proved, by clear and convincing evidence, that Respondent failed to secure the required workers' compensation coverage for its "employees" during the period of non-compliance. The Department property calculated the penalty.
18-001632  DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION vs PFR SERVICES CORP.  (2018)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 27, 2018
The issues in this case are: (1) whether Respondent, PFR Services Corp., failed to secure the payment of workers' compensation coverage for its employees in violation of chapter 440, Florida Statutes (2017)2/; and (2) if so, the penalty that should be imposed.Petitioner proved that Respondent failed to secure workers' compensation coverage for its employees during the audit period. Recommend credit toward penalty be given for premium payment and down payment to release Stop-Work Order.
18-005117  DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION vs CABLE WIZARD CORP.  (2018)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 25, 2018
The issue is whether Respondent's otherwise-untimely filing of a request for a hearing on a proposed penalty for failing to secure workers' compensation coverage is timely due to the doctrine of equitable tolling.Nonagency party proved that its petition was timely filed under doctrine of equitable tolling because agency rep lulled or misled nonagency rep as to the deadline for filing.
18-004121  DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION vs ALMIROLA BUILDING SERVICES, INC.  (2018)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 06, 2018
The issues are whether Respondent, Almirola Building Services, Inc. (“Respondent”), failed to secure workers’ compensation coverage for its employees; and, if so, whether the Department of Financial Services, Division of Workers’ Compensation (“Petitioner” or “Department”), correctly calculated the penalty assessment imposed against Respondent.Respondent had employees who were required to be covered by workers' compensation insurance, yet were not. Other employees were covered so the Department's assessment should be reduced to $58,746.52.
18-003120  DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION vs MCLENDON BUILDER, INC.  (2018)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 18, 2018
The issue is whether Mclendon Builders, Inc. (“Mclendon Builders”), had insufficient workers’ compensation insurance during the time period in question; and, if so, the amount of the resulting penalty.Respondent failed to provide persuasive evidence to support its affirmative defense.
17-006447  DEPARTMENT OF FINANCIAL SERVICES, DIVISION OF WORKERS' COMPENSATION vs GREGG CONSTRUCTION  (2017)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 27, 2017
Whether Respondent violated chapter 440, Florida Statutes (2016), by failing to secure payment of workers’ compensation coverage, as alleged in the Stop-Work Order (“SWO”) and Third Amended Order of Penalty Assessment (“Third AOPA”); and, if so, whether Petitioner correctly calculated the proposed penalty assessment against Respondent.The Department established by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent, a company engaged in the construction industry, failed to obtain Workers' Compensation coverage for its employee during the audit period.

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