welcome to elawyers.us
Elawyers Elawyers
Ohio| Change
  1. Home
  2. Find a Lawyer
  6. Michael P. Reitzell
Michael P. Reitzell
Michael P. Reitzell
Visitors: 39
0
Bar #528099(FL)     License for 23 years; Member in Good Standing
West Palm Beach FL

Are you Michael P. Reitzell? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

18-1565  GERARDO MARTINEZ v. RUEBIN A. MARTIN  (2019)
District Court of Appeal of Florida Filed: May 01, 2019
NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE REHEARING MOTION AND, IF FILED, DETERMINED IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF FLORIDA SECOND DISTRICT GERARDO MARTINEZ, ) ) Appellant, ) ) v. ) Case No. 2D18-1565 ) RUEBIN A. MARTIN, ) ) Appellee. ) ) Opinion filed May 1, 2019. Appeal from the Circuit Court for Hillsborough County; Martha J. Cook, Judge. David A. Papa of Papa & Gipe, P.A., Clearwater, for Appellant. Anthony J. Russo and Mihaela Cabulea of Butler, Weihmuller Katz Craig LLP, Tampa; and Mark S. R..
17-001768  NEW COUNTRY MOTOR CARS OF PALM BEACH, LLC, D/B/A MASERATI OF PALM BEACH vs MASERATI NORTH AMERICA, INC.  (2017)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 21, 2017
Whether Respondent, Maserati North America, Inc.’s ("MNA"), proposed 2017 Commercial Policy Program ("2017 Program") is a modification of the franchise agreement between MNA and Petitioner, New Country Motor Cars of Palm Beach, LLC, d/b/a Maserati of Palm Beach ("Palm Beach"), or Petitioner Recovery Racing, LLC, d/b/a Maserati of Ft. Lauderdale ("Fort Lauderdale"); and, if so, whether it is fair and not prohibited by section 320.641(3), Florida Statutes (2016). Whether MNA’s proposed modifications to the Existing Franchise Agreements with Petitioners are fair and not prohibited under section 320.641(3).The manufacturer proved that a majority of modifications to the dealer franchise agreements was fair and not prohibited, a few were not. Modifications to its dealer bonus program made by the 2017 Commercial Policy program were fair and not prohibited.
17-001770  RECOVERY RACING, LLC, D/B/A MASERATI OF FT. LAUDERDALE vs MASERATI NORTH AMERICA, INC.  (2017)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 21, 2017
Whether Respondent, Maserati North America, Inc.’s ("MNA"), proposed 2017 Commercial Policy Program ("2017 Program") is a modification of the franchise agreement between MNA and Petitioner, New Country Motor Cars of Palm Beach, LLC, d/b/a Maserati of Palm Beach ("Palm Beach"), or Petitioner Recovery Racing, LLC, d/b/a Maserati of Ft. Lauderdale ("Fort Lauderdale"); and, if so, whether it is fair and not prohibited by section 320.641(3), Florida Statutes (2016). Whether MNA’s proposed modifications to the Existing Franchise Agreements with Petitioners are fair and not prohibited under section 320.641(3).The manufacturer proved that a majority of modifications to the dealer franchise agreements was fair and not prohibited, a few were not. Modifications to its dealer bonus program made by the 2017 Commercial Policy program were fair and not prohibited.
05-001305  PINELLAS COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD vs MICHAEL P. BEGENY  (2005)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 12, 2005
The issue in this proceeding is whether Petitioner should dismiss Respondent as an educational support employee for alleged inappropriate interactions with colleagues, including physical and verbal altercations, failure to correct performance deficiencies, and insubordination.Petitioner should dismiss Respondent, who engaged in a sustained pattern of inadequate performance, insubordination, and inappropriate conduct.
99-005368RP  GTE FLORIDA, INC. vs FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION  (1999)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Dec. 23, 1999
Whether proposed rules 25-4.300 ("Scope and Definition"); 25-4.301 ("Applicability of Fresh Look"); and 25-4.302, ("Termination of Local Exchange Contracts"), Florida Administrative Code, known as "The Fresh Look Provision," constitute an "invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority"."Fresh look" rules held invalid exercises of delegated legislative authority upon constitutional grounds.
99-005369RP  BELLSOUTH TELECOMMUNICATIONS, INC., F/K/A SOUTHERN BELL TELEPHONE AND TELEGRAPH COMPANY vs FLORIDA PUBLIC SERVICE COMMISSION  (1999)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Dec. 23, 1999
Whether proposed rules 25-4.300 ("Scope and Definition"); 25-4.301 ("Applicability of Fresh Look"); and 25-4.302, ("Termination of Local Exchange Contracts"), Florida Administrative Code, known as "The Fresh Look Provision," constitute an "invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority"."Fresh look" rules held invalid exercises of delegated legislative authority upon constitutional grounds.

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