Leon FL Litigation and Workers compensation Lawyers | Paul A -- eLawyers

17-003894RX FLORIDA AUTOMOBILE DEALERS ASSOCIATION vs FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HIGHWAY SAFETY AND MOTOR VEHICLES (2017)

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

Whether Florida Administrative Code Rule 15C-16.012(5)1/ (the “Rule”) is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority.Petitioner demonstrated that existing rule 15C-16.012(5) is an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority.

98-001178RP FLORIDA MEDICAL ASSOCIATION, INC. vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (1998)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 06, 1998

Is proposed rule 59G-3.010(4)(b)2.c. an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority, for reasons described in the respective petitions that formed the basis of this dispute? See Section 120.56(2), Florida Statutes.Agency did not have legislative authority to implement a policy change, only the Legislature had authority.

96-004031CON FMC HOSPITAL, LTD. vs THE NORTH BROWARD HOSPITAL DISTRICT, D/B/A BROWARD GENERAL MEDICAL CENTER AND AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (1996)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 28, 1996

Whether the certificate of need application to convert 30 acute care beds to 30 adult psychiatric beds at Broward General Medical Center meets the statutory and rule criteria for approval.North Broward Hospital District d/b/a Broward General met criteria for issuance of certificate of need (CON) to convert acute care to psychiatric beds; recommended denial based on request for twice as many beds as needed.

96-004018CON HEALTHCARE SYSTEMS, U.S.A., INC. vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (1996)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 28, 1996

Whether there is a need for any additional home health care agencies in AHCA District 5 for Pinellas and Pasco Counties, and, whether the certificate of need applications filed in March 1996 to establish Medicare-certified home health agencies in District 5 meet, on balance, the statutory and rule criteria for approval.No need for additional home health agency in planning horizon set by rule, although numeric need method in rule was invalidated in prior case.

96-005406CON PETERSEN HEALTH CARE, INC. vs MORTON PLANT MEASE HEALTH CENTER, INC., AND AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (1996)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 15, 1996

This proceeding involves competing Certificate of Need (CON) applications for nursing home beds in AHCA District 5, Subdistrict 1, Pasco County. The issue for determination is which of the three applicants should be awarded a CON for 57 nursing home beds for the January 1999 planning horizon.Among three competing applicants, all of whom meet criteria, the nursing home bed Certificate of Need (CON) should go to the applicant proposing innovative approach to service delivery.

96-002444CON BEVERLY SAVANA CAY MANOR, INC. vs BSH HEALTH SERVICES, INC.; AND AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (1996)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 23, 1996

This is a certificate of need proceeding in which each of the three Petitioners seeks to be awarded a certificate of need for the construction of a new 118-bed nursing home in AHCA District 1, Subdistrict 1, comprised of Escambia and Santa Rosa Counties. Each Petitioner asserts entitlement to the award on the basis that its application is, for a variety of reasons, the best of the three competing applications. The ultimate issue to be resolved is a determination as to which of these three applicants best meets the statutory and rule criteria for the issuance of a certificate of need in response to the projected numeric need of 118 beds.1Upon review of all relevant Certificate Of Need (CON) criteria, CON should be awarded to best of three good applicants.

94-000905BID GRAPHIC DATA SYSTEMS CORPORATION vs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION (1994)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Feb. 21, 1994

Whether the Respondent, State of Florida, Department of Transportation, (the "Department"), acted arbitrarily or illegally in deciding to award the Intervenor, Intergraph Corporation, the contract for RFP-DOT-93/94 9008? The parties stipulated that the Department did not act fraudulently or dishonestly in issuing its notice to award the contract to Intergraph.Petitioner did not establish that subcontractor and certified minority business enterprise was a conduit under proposal in response to an Request For Proposal.

Paul Anthony Vazquez