welcome to elawyers.us
Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change
  1. Home
  2. Find a Lawyer
  8. Maureen McCarthy Daughton
Maureen McCarthy Daughton
Maureen McCarthy Daughton
Visitors: 96
2
Bar #655805(FL)     License for 38 years
Tallahassee FL

Are you Maureen McCarthy Daughton? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

Related Laws :

USC: 42 U.S.C 1395w

CFR: 42 CFR 422, 42 CFR 422.350, 42 CFR 422.350, 42 CFR 422.350, 42 CFR 422.352, 42 CFR 422.354

Florida Laws: 1002.31, 1002.33, 1003.03, 120.52, 120.54, 120.56, 120.569, 120.57, 120.595, 120.60, 120.68, 163.3177, 163.3180, 163.3184, 163.3191, 163.3209, 20.121, 20.23, 26.012, 286.0113, 287.001, 287.012, 287.042, 287.057, 334.044, 338.2216, 35.22, 381.00315, 395.002, 397.301, 397.305, 397.321, 397.419, 397.427, 403.509, 403.52, 403.521, 403.522, 403.525, 403.526, 403.527, 403.5271, 403.529, 403.531, 403.5365, 403.537, 409.901, 409.912, 409.91211, 409.913, 409.962, 409.966, 409.974, 420.501, 420.504, 420.507, 420.5087, 420.509, 420.5099, 420.517, 456.053, 509.049, 509.261, 57.105, 624.307, 624.308, 624.509, 625.111, 627.7711, 627.777, 627.780, 627.782, 627.783, 627.7831, 627.784, 627.7841, 627.7843, 627.7845, 627.7865, 641.316, 697.04, 704.06, 760.01, 760.10, 760.11, 90.202, 90.203, 90.801, 90.804

Florida Administrative Code: 28-106.217, 28-110.004, 62-17.625, 67 -60.008, 67-48.002, 67-48.025, 67-49.001, 67-49.005, 67-60.008, 67-60.009, 69O-186.003, 69O-186.005, 9J-5.003

16-006611RU  JONATHAN L. WOLF, BERKSHIRE SQUARE, LTD; HAWTHORNE PARK, LTD; AND SOUTHWICK COMMONS, LTD vs FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION  (2016)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 14, 2016
The issues are (1) whether Florida Administrative Code Rules 67-48.002(95) and 67-60.010(3) are invalid exercises of delegated legislative authority; and (2) whether certain statements in Request for Application 2016-113 (RFA-113) issued by Respondent, Florida Housing Finance Corporation (Florida Housing or agency), are unlawful unadopted rules in violation of section 120.54(1)(a), Florida Statutes (2016).Petitioners did not prove that two existing rules were invalid or that various statements were unadopted rules.
16-004132BID  ST. ELIZABETH GARDENS APARTMENTS, LTD. vs FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION  (2016)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 22, 2016
The issue for determination in this consolidated bid protest proceeding is whether the Florida Housing Finance Corporation’s (“FHFC”) intended award of tax credits for the preservation of existing affordable housing developments was clearly erroneous, contrary to competition, arbitrary, or capricious.Petitioners failed to demonstrate that the Florida Housing Finance Corporation's intended award of tax credits was clearly erroneous, contrary to competition, arbitrary, or capricious.
16-004133BID  MARIAN TOWERS, LTD. vs FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION  (2016)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 22, 2016
The issue for determination in this consolidated bid protest proceeding is whether the Florida Housing Finance Corporation’s (“FHFC”) intended award of tax credits for the preservation of existing affordable housing developments was clearly erroneous, contrary to competition, arbitrary, or capricious.Petitioners failed to demonstrate that the Florida Housing Finance Corporation's intended award of tax credits was clearly erroneous, contrary to competition, arbitrary, or capricious.
15-003775BID  ACCENTURE, LLP vs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION  (2015)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 30, 2015
The issue in this bid protest matter is whether the decision of Respondent, Department of Transportation, to award the contract for the Centralized Customer Service System to Intervenor, Xerox State and Local Solutions, Inc., over Petitioner, Accenture, LLP, was contrary to its governing statutes, rules or policies, or the solicitation specifications.Petitioner failed to show that Department's intended award of contract to Intervenor was contrary to its governing statutes or solicitation specifications or that Department action was clearly erroneous, contrary to competition, arbitrary or capricious.
15-002386BID  CAPITAL GROVE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP vs FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION  (2015)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 28, 2015
Whether Florida Housing Finance Corporation’s (Florida Housing, Corporation, or Respondent) rejection of the funding for the application submitted by Capital Grove Limited Partnership (Capital Grove) was contrary to Florida Housing’s governing statutes, rules, policies, or the specifications of Request for Applications 2014-114 (the RFA). If so, whether Florida Housing’s decision to fund the application submitted by HTG Wellington Family, LLC (HTG Wellington), is contrary to governing statutes, rules, policies, or the RFA specifications.Protester failed to establish standing or that its application should be approved for funding.
14-001362BID  HTG BROWARD 3, LLC vs FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION  (2014)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 24, 2014
The issue for determination is whether Respondent's intended decision to award low-income housing tax credits to Wisdom Village Crossing, LP (Wisdom Village), and Oakland Preserve, LLC (Oakland Preserve), is contrary to governing statutes, Respondent's rules, or the solicitation specifications.Petitioner did not prove that scoring on proposed funding awards were contrary to statute, rule, or RFA, or were clearly erroneous, contrary to competion, arbitrary or capricious.
14-001398BID  PINNACLE RIO, LLC vs FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION  (2014)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 25, 2014
The issue for determination is whether Respondent's intended decision to award low-income housing tax credits in Miami-Dade County through Request for Applications 2013-003 to HTG Miami-Dade 5, LLC, and Allapattah Trace Apartments, Ltd., is contrary to governing statutes, the corporation’s rules or policies, or the solicitation specifications.Respondent's determination that Petitioner APC Four Forty Four was ineligible was clearly erroneous, but Petitioners failed to prove Respondent's intended allocation of tax credits was contrary to governing statutes, rules, or solicitation specifications.
14-001399BID  PINNACLE RIO, LLC vs FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION  (2014)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 25, 2014
The issue for determination is whether Respondent's intended decision to award low-income housing tax credits in Miami-Dade County through Request for Applications 2013-003 to HTG Miami-Dade 5, LLC, and Allapattah Trace Apartments, Ltd., is contrary to governing statutes, the corporation’s rules or policies, or the solicitation specifications.Respondent's determination that Petitioner APC Four Forty Four was ineligible was clearly erroneous, but Petitioners failed to prove Respondent's intended allocation of tax credits was contrary to governing statutes, rules, or solicitation specifications.
14-001400BID  TOWN CENTER PHASE TWO, LLC vs FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION  (2014)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 25, 2014
The issue for determination is whether Respondent's intended decision to award low-income housing tax credits in Miami-Dade County through Request for Applications 2013-003 to HTG Miami-Dade 5, LLC, and Allapattah Trace Apartments, Ltd., is contrary to governing statutes, the corporation’s rules or policies, or the solicitation specifications.Respondent's determination that Petitioner APC Four Forty Four was ineligible was clearly erroneous, but Petitioners failed to prove Respondent's intended allocation of tax credits was contrary to governing statutes, rules, or solicitation specifications.
14-001428BID  APC FOUR FORTY FOUR, LTD. vs FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION  (2014)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 25, 2014
The issue for determination is whether Respondent's intended decision to award low-income housing tax credits in Miami-Dade County through Request for Applications 2013-003 to HTG Miami-Dade 5, LLC, and Allapattah Trace Apartments, Ltd., is contrary to governing statutes, the corporation’s rules or policies, or the solicitation specifications.Respondent's determination that Petitioner APC Four Forty Four was ineligible was clearly erroneous, but Petitioners failed to prove Respondent's intended allocation of tax credits was contrary to governing statutes, rules, or solicitation specifications.

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