Leon FL Administrative law, Insurance and Litigation Lawyers -- eLawyers

18-001781BID HARRIS CORPORATION vs DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES (2018)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 05, 2018

The issue to determine in this bid protest matter is whether Respondent’s (Department of Management Services’), intended award of the Statewide Law Enforcement Radio Communications System to Intervenor, Motorola Solutions, Inc., was contrary to its governing statutes, rules, or the solicitation specifications.Petitioner had standing to initiate the bid protest. However, Petitioner failed to prove that the Department's intended award to Intervenor was contrary to its governing statutes, rules, or the solicitation specifications.

17-006655RU DACCO BEHAVORIAL HEALTH, INC.; OPERATION PAR, INC.; AND ASPIRE PARTNERS, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF CHILDREN AND FAMILIES (2017)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Dec. 11, 2017

The issue in this case is whether Florida Administrative Code Emergency Rule 65DER17-2 (the “Emergency Rule”) constitutes an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority as defined in section 120.52(8), Florida Statutes. (Unless specifically stated otherwise herein, all references to Florida Statutes will be to the 2017 version.) More specifically, on September 19, 2017, the Florida Department of Children and Families (the “Department”), published the Emergency Rule, which dealt with the need for and licensing of new methadone medication-assisted treatment centers for persons dealing with opioid addiction. Pursuant to the Emergency Rule, the Department decided which providers would receive approval notices to submit licensure applications in certain counties based on the order in which complete and responsive applications were received by the Department. A number of parties are challenging the validity of the Emergency Rule.The Emergency Rule constitutes an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority.

18-000068CON MARION COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, INC., D/B/A WEST MARION COMMUNITY HOSPITAL AND OCALA REGIONAL MEDICAL CENTER vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION AND FLORIDA HOSPITAL WATERMAN, INC., D/B/A FLORIDA HOSPITAL WATERMAN (2018)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jan. 05, 2018

Should the Agency for Health Care Administration (Agency) approve Certificate of Need (CON) Application No. 10499 of Marion Community Hospital, Inc. (Marion Community), d/b/a West Marion Community Hospital (West Marion), to add 12 comprehensive medical rehabilitation (CMR) beds to its facility? Should the Agency approve CON Application No. 10496 of Florida Hospital Waterman, Inc. (Waterman), to add 12 CMR beds to its facility?Waterman Hosp., Lake Co., better for "needed" 12-bed CMR unit. Not normal circumstances proved need for two 12-bed CMR units, one in Lake Co. and one in Marion Co. Not normal argument was not an application amendment.

18-000075CON FLORIDA HOSPITAL WATERMAN, INC., D/B/A FLORIDA HOSPITAL WATERMAN vs MARION COMMUNITY HOSPITAL, INC. (2018)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jan. 05, 2018

Should the Agency for Health Care Administration (Agency) approve Certificate of Need (CON) Application No. 10499 of Marion Community Hospital, Inc. (Marion Community), d/b/a West Marion Community Hospital (West Marion), to add 12 comprehensive medical rehabilitation (CMR) beds to its facility? Should the Agency approve CON Application No. 10496 of Florida Hospital Waterman, Inc. (Waterman), to add 12 CMR beds to its facility?Waterman Hosp., Lake Co., better for "needed" 12-bed CMR unit. Not normal circumstances proved need for two 12-bed CMR units, one in Lake Co and one in Marion Co. Not normal argument was not an application amendment.

18-004242BID SOUTH FLORIDA COMMUNITY CARE NETWORK, LLC, D/B/A COMMUNITY CARE PLAN vs FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH (2018)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 15, 2018

The issue to be determined in this bid protest matter is whether Respondent Department of Health’s (DOH or the Department) intended award of the contract arising out of Invitation to Negotiate No. DOH-17-026 (ITN) for the Children’s Medical Services Managed Care Plan (CMS Plan) to Intervenor Wellcare of Florida, Inc., d/b/a Staywell Health Plan (Staywell), was contrary to its governing statutes, rules, or the solicitation specifications.Petitioner did not prove that the Department's intended award of the contract to Intervenor was contrary to its governing statutes, rules, or the ITN's specifications.

16-006663RX NICOLE YONTZ, OD AND TAMMY JOHNSON, OD vs DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH, BOARD OF OPTOMETRY (2016)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 14, 2016

The issue to be determined is whether Florida Administrative Code Rule 64B13-4.001 (the Rule), adopted by the Florida Board of Optometry (the Board), is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority.Petitioners demonstrated that the rule's look-back period for test scores is an invalid exercise of delegated authority in violation of section 120.52(8)(b) and (c).

14-002798BID XEROX STATE AND LOCAL SOLUTIONS, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE (2014)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 16, 2014

The issue in this proceeding is whether the Respondent's intended award of Invitation to Negotiate (ITN) 13/14-01 was contrary to the Department's governing statutes, rules or policies; contrary to the solicitation specifications; and was clearly erroneous, contrary to competition, arbitrary or capricious.Evidence showed intended ITN award appropriate. Neither statute nor ITN required negotiations to be concluded before intended award posted. Renewal price, unless separately stated, was the proposed contract price.

14-000985BID KEEFE COMMISSARY NETWORK, L.L.C. vs DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS (2014)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 04, 2014

Whether the Florida Department of Corrections’ (Department) intended decision to award Trinity Services Group, Inc. (Trinity) with a contract for Statewide Canteen Operations under Invitation to Bid, DOC ITB-13-015 (ITB), is contrary to the agency’s governing statutes, rules or policies, or the bid specifications.Petitioner failed to prove that Respondent acted contraty to its governing statutes, rules or policies, or the bid specifications.

05-002630RP ATTORNEYS` TITLE INSURANCE FUND, INC., AND FLORIDA LAND TITLE ASSOCIATION, INC. vs FINANCIAL SERVICES COMMISSION, AND OFFICE OF INSURANCE REGULATION (2005)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 25, 2005

Whether Proposed Rule 69O-186.003(1)(c) should be invalidated on the grounds that it is an invalid delegation of legislative authority as defined in Section 120.52(8), Florida Statutes (2005).1OIR failed to proved that procedures followed in publishing notice of intent to adopt Proposed Rule 690-186.003(l)(c) did not materially deviate from rulemaking procedures. Proposed Rule is, therefore, invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority.

02-002505RX FLORIDA POOL AND SPA ASSOCIATION, INC. vs FLORIDA BUILDING COMMISSION (2002)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 17, 2002

Count I: Whether Rule 424.2.17.1.9 of the Florida Building, Code, through an amendment of Rule 9B-3.047, Florida Administrative Code, is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority because it: (a) enlarges, modifies, or contravenes the statute; (b) exceeds the statutory rule-making authority of the Florida Building Commission; (c) is arbitrary and capricious; and/or (d) is not based on competent substantial evidence. Count II: Whether this Rule was adopted contrary to, and in violation of, the Florida Building Commission's stated rule- making procedure due to a prior settlement. Count III: Whether, with regard to this Rule, the Florida Building Commission failed to adopt a less costly regulatory alternative; and Count IV: Whether Chapter 515, Florida Statutes, is unconstitutional.1/There cannot be a valid delegation of legislative authority to support a rule amendment where the Legislature has clearly determined that the rule amendment should be superceded by previous rule language.

Mia Loraine McKown