welcome to elawyers.us
Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
  1. Home
  2. Find a Lawyer
  8. Lorraine Marie Novak
Lorraine Marie Novak
Lorraine Marie Novak
Visitors: 133
0
Bar #23851(FL)     License for 31 years
Tallahassee FL

Are you Lorraine Marie Novak? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

Related Laws :

USC: 33 U.S.C 1319, 33 U.S.C 1365

CFR: 40 CFR 122.4, 40 CFR 122.4, 40 CFR 122.4, 42 CFR 418.20, 42 CFR 418.20, 42 CFR 418.20, 42 CFR 418.3

Florida Laws: 1.01, 101.20, 11.07, 120.52, 120.54, 120.541, 120.542, 120.56, 120.569, 120.57, 120.595, 120.60, 120.68, 17.43, 26.012, 373.403, 373.406, 373.4595, 395.002, 400.021, 400.23, 400.235, 400.601, 400.609, 400.6095, 403.031, 403.067, 403.813, 408.031, 408.032, 408.033, 408.034, 408.035, 408.036, 408.0361, 408.037, 408.039, 408.040, 408.042, 408.043, 408.045, 408.0455, 408.07, 408.15, 408.7071, 409.967, 418.22, 456.073, 57.105, 57.111, 7.37, 768.28, 90.803

Florida Administrative Code: 28-106.201, 28-106.217, 59A-3.2085, 59A-3.253, 59C-1.008, 59C-1.018, 59C-1.0355, 59C-1.040

18-002664  MARINEMAX, INC. vs LARRY LYNN AND DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  (2018)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 22, 2018
The issue to determine in this matter is whether Respondent Department of Environmental Protection (DEP) properly issued its proposed verification of an Environmental Resource Permit (ERP) exemption, dated March 23, 2018, for the installation of nine pilings off of Respondent Larry Lynn’s residential property, in the direction of Petitioner MarineMax, Inc.’s commercial property (MarineMax), pursuant to section 373.406(6), Florida Statutes, commonly known as the “de minimus” exemption.Mr. Lynn's installation of nine pilings off of his residential property does not create minimal or insignificant individual or cumulative impacts on the water resources, and, therefore, qualify for an exemption from an environmental resource permit.
17-003684RP  BASF CORPORATION vs DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION  (2017)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 26, 2017
The issue to be determined in this case is whether proposed Florida Administrative Code Rule 62-304.305(5) is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority.DEP failed to prove that the proposed rule, which would establish a Total Maximum Daily Load for nutrients in Lake Talquin, was not an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority.
15-005549CON  NORTH BROWARD HOSPITAL DISTRICT, D/B/A BROWARD HEALTH MEDICAL CENTER vs SOUTH BROWARD HOSPITAL DISTRICT, D/B/A MEMORIAL REGIONAL HOSPITAL, AND AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION  (2015)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Oct. 02, 2015
Whether Certificate of Need (CON) applications 10386 and 10388 filed by South Broward Hospital District, d/b/a Memorial Regional Hospital (Memorial), to establish a pediatric kidney transplantation program at Joe DiMaggio Children’s Hospital and an adult kidney transplantation program at Memorial Regional Hospital in Broward County, both of which are proposed for organ transplantation service area (OTSA) 4, should be approved. Alternatively, do competing CON applications 10387 and 10389 filed by North Broward Hospital District, d/b/a Broward Health Medical Center (Broward Health), to establish a pediatric kidney transplantation program at Chris Evert Children’s Hospital and Broward Health Medical Center, on balance, better satisfy the applicable statutory and rule review criteria for award of a CON to establish a pediatric or adult kidney transplantation program in OTSA 4?As between two competing applicants to establish adult and pediatric kidney transplant programs in OTSA 4, Memorial's proposals are superior to those submitted by Broward Health, and should therefore be approved.
15-005550CON  NORTH BROWARD HOSPITAL DISTRICT, D/B/A BROWARD HEALTH MEDICAL CENTER vs SOUTH BROWARD HOSPITAL DISTRICT, D/B/A MEMORIAL REGIONAL HOSPITAL AND AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION  (2015)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Oct. 02, 2015
Whether Certificate of Need (CON) applications 10386 and 10388 filed by South Broward Hospital District, d/b/a Memorial Regional Hospital (Memorial), to establish a pediatric kidney transplantation program at Joe DiMaggio Children’s Hospital and an adult kidney transplantation program at Memorial Regional Hospital in Broward County, both of which are proposed for organ transplantation service area (OTSA) 4, should be approved. Alternatively, do competing CON applications 10387 and 10389 filed by North Broward Hospital District, d/b/a Broward Health Medical Center (Broward Health), to establish a pediatric kidney transplantation program at Chris Evert Children’s Hospital and Broward Health Medical Center, on balance, better satisfy the applicable statutory and rule review criteria for award of a CON to establish a pediatric or adult kidney transplantation program in OTSA 4?As between two competing applicants to establish adult and pediatric kidney transplant programs in OTSA 4, Memorial's proposals are superior to those submitted by Broward Health, and should therefore be approved.
15-000129CON  SOUTH BROWARD HOSPITAL DISTRICT, D/B/A MEMORIAL HEALTHCARE SYSTEM vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION  (2015)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jan. 08, 2015
Whether Certificate of Need (CON) Application No. 10235, filed by Plantation General Hospital Limited Partnership, d/b/a Plantation General Hospital (PGH) to establish a 200-bed replacement, acute care hospital in Davie, Broward County, Florida, Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA or Agency) acute care District 10, satisfies, on balance, the applicable statutory and rule review criteria.Due to the physical constraints of its existing facility and other factors, Plantation General Hospital established the need for its proposed replacement hospital. Impact on competitors not sufficient to warrant denial.
15-000130CON  CLEVELAND CLINIC FLORIDA HEALTH SYSTEM NONPROFIT CORPORATION, D/B/A CLEVELAND CLINIC HOSPITAL vs PLANTATION GENERAL HOSPITAL LIMITED PARTNERSHIP, D/B/A PLANTATION GENERAL HOSPITAL AND AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION  (2015)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jan. 08, 2015
Whether Certificate of Need (CON) Application No. 10235, filed by Plantation General Hospital Limited Partnership, d/b/a Plantation General Hospital (PGH) to establish a 200-bed replacement, acute care hospital in Davie, Broward County, Florida, Agency for Health Care Administration (AHCA or Agency) acute care District 10, satisfies, on balance, the applicable statutory and rule review criteria.Due to the physical constraints of its existing facility and other factors, Plantation General Hospital established the need for its proposed replacement hospital. Impact on competitors not sufficient to warrant denial.
15-002001CON  LIFEPATH HOSPICE, INC. vs WEST FLORIDA HEALTH, INC.; AND AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION  (2015)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 13, 2015
Whether the Certificate of Need (“CON”) applications filed by Seasons Hospice and Palliative Care, Inc. (“Seasons”); Gulfside Hospice and Pasco Palliative Care, Inc. (“Gulfside”); and West Florida Health, Inc. (“West Florida”); for a new hospice program in Agency for Health Care Administration (“AHCA” or the “Agency”) Service Area 6A/Hillsborough County, satisfy the applicable statutory and rule review criteria sufficiently to warrant approval, and, if so, which of the three applications best meets the applicable criteria, on balance, for approval.On balance, Seasons best satisfied the criteria for approval of its Certificate of Need application in this comparative review.
15-002003CON  SEASONS HOSPICE AND PALLIATIVE CARE OF TAMPA, LLC vs WEST FLORIDA HEALTH, INC., AND AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION  (2015)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 13, 2015
Whether the Certificate of Need (“CON”) applications filed by Seasons Hospice and Palliative Care, Inc. (“Seasons”); Gulfside Hospice and Pasco Palliative Care, Inc. (“Gulfside”); and West Florida Health, Inc. (“West Florida”); for a new hospice program in Agency for Health Care Administration (“AHCA” or the “Agency”) Service Area 6A/Hillsborough County, satisfy the applicable statutory and rule review criteria sufficiently to warrant approval, and, if so, which of the three applications best meets the applicable criteria, on balance, for approval.On balance, Seasons best satisfied the criteria for approval of its Certificate of Need application in this comparative review.
15-002008CON  GULFSIDE HOSPICE AND PASCO PALLIATIVE CARE, INC. vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION  (2015)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 13, 2015
Whether the Certificate of Need (“CON”) applications filed by Seasons Hospice and Palliative Care, Inc. (“Seasons”); Gulfside Hospice and Pasco Palliative Care, Inc. (“Gulfside”); and West Florida Health, Inc. (“West Florida”); for a new hospice program in Agency for Health Care Administration (“AHCA” or the “Agency”) Service Area 6A/Hillsborough County, satisfy the applicable statutory and rule review criteria sufficiently to warrant approval, and, if so, which of the three applications best meets the applicable criteria, on balance, for approval.On balance, Seasons best satisfied the criteria for approval of its Certificate of Need application in this comparative review.
14-001367CON  HERNANDO-PASCO HOSPICE, INC. vs HOSPICE OF CITRUS COUNTY, INC., D/B/A HOSPICE OF CITRUS AND THE NATURE COAST, AND AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION  (2014)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 24, 2014
Did Nature Coast demonstrate special circumstances to justify approval of its Certificate of Need (CON) application to establish a new hospice program in Service Area 3D, Hernando County, in the absence of published numeric need? If Nature Coast demonstrated special circumstances to justify approval, does Nature Coast's proposal satisfy the requirements of Florida Administrative Code Rule 59C-1.0355, and section 408.035, Florida Statutes (2014)?1/Minors' need for CMS services that only hospices can provide established special circumstances showing need. Hospice didn't prove reasonable utilization projections and financial feasibility. Failure outweighed need. Denial recommended.

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