Orange FL Lawyers | Robert Minarcin -- eLawyers

Robert Minarcin

Visitors: 53

407-254-3227

Bar #163147(FL) License for 25 years

Orlando FL

Are you Robert Minarcin? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

Florida Administrative Code: 28-106.215, 61J1-4.010, 61J1-7.001, 61J1-7.004, 61J1-8.002

09-005356PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs HOWARD KLAHR (2009)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Oct. 01, 2009

Did the Respondent, Howard Klahr, fail to deliver or communicate appraisals of properties located at 5821 Southwest 20th Street, Miami, Florida and 2761-63 Southwest 31 Place, Miami, Florida 33133? Did Respondent, Howard Klahr, commit or make fraud, misrepresentation, concealment, false promises, false pretenses, dishonest conduct, culpable negligence, or breach of trust in his business relationship with Jane Asorey. What is the proper discipline, if any, to be imposed on Respondent, Howard Klahr (Mr. Klahr)?Clear and convincing evidence proved property appraiser who was paid in advance did not communicate appraisal and breached trust in a business transaction. $1,000 fine, 90-day suspension, 18-month probation with education, and restitution penalty.

09-003946PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs MICHAEL ANTHONY FACENDO (2009)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 23, 2009

Whether the Respondent committed the violations stated in the Amended Administrative Complaint filed September 30, 2009, and, if so, the penalty that should be imposed.Petitioner failed to prove breach of trust, culpable negligence or misrepresentation in preparation of appraisal report and also failed to prove violation of USPAP 1991; the evidence related only to USPAP 2006. All charges should be dismissed.

09-000642PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs JAMES EDWARD LESTER, JR. (2009)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Feb. 06, 2009

The issues in this case are whether Respondent violated the provisions of Section 475.624(2), (14) and (15), Florida Statutes (2006)1/, as alleged in the Administrative Complaint, and if so, what penalty should be imposed?Petitioner failed to demonstrate the allegations in the Amended Administrative Complaint because Respondent did not sign the reports and the USPAP standards alleged are not the standards incorporated by statute.

09-001514 DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs NESTOR G. MENDOZA AND DIAMONDS REALTY OF MIAMI BEACH (2009)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 20, 2009

In this disciplinary proceeding, the issues are: (1) Whether Respondents committed the violations alleged in the Administrative Complaint issued by the Petitioner; and (2) Whether disciplinary penalties should be imposed on Respondents, or either of them, if Petitioner proves one or more of the violations charged in its Administrative Complaint.Petitioner met its burden and demonstrated that Respondents violated the offenses in the administrative complaint.

08-006260PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs DEBORAH M. HALL (2008)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Dec. 17, 2008

The issue in this case is whether Respondent violated standards for a certified real estate appraisal, and, if so, what sanction should be imposed.Petitioner did not prove by clear and convincing evidence that Respondent violated the statute.

09-001219PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs NESTOR G. MENDOZA AND DIAMONDS REALTY OF MIAMI BEACH (2009)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 09, 2009

In this disciplinary proceeding, the issues are whether Respondents, who are licensed real estate brokers, failed to preserve and make available certain records relating to trust accounts and real estate transactions, and/or obstructed or hindered Petitioner's investigators in an official investigation, as alleged by Petitioner in its Administrative Complaint. If Petitioner proves one or more of the alleged violations, then an additional question will arise, namely whether disciplinary penalties should be imposed on Respondents, or either of them.Petitioner's evidence was insufficient to prove that Respondents, who are licensed real estate brokers, failed to preserve and make available certain records and/or obstructed or hindered Petitioner's investigators in an offical investigation.

08-000319F VICTOR HARRISON vs DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE (2008)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jan. 16, 2008

After the application for attorney's fees and costs had been filed, DBPR filed a Motion to Dismiss on February 6, 2008. On that same date Harrison responded to the motion. On February 11, 2008, Harrison filed a supplemental response to the motion.Petitioner was not entitled to attorney`s fees and costs. He was not a "small business party."

08-003271PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs CATHY C. PFEIFFER (2008)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 07, 2008

The issues in this case are whether Respondent violated Subsections 475.624(14) and 475.624(15), Florida Statutes (2005),1 and if so, what discipline should be imposed.Respondent failed to sign an appraisal as the supervising appraiser and stated that she had inspected the property when she had not done so. Mitigating circumstances are sufficient to reduce the penalty.

08-004616PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs FRANK LAPLATTE (2008)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 19, 2008

The issues in this case are whether the allegations of the Amended Administrative Complaint are correct, and, if so, what penalty should be imposed.Violation of professional standards in real estate warrants suspension, fine, probation, and educaiton.

08-004417PL DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs JESSALYN RODRIGUEZ (2008)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 09, 2008

The issues in this case are whether Respondent, Jessalyn Rodriguez, committed the violations alleged in a seven-count Administrative Complaint, filed with the Petitioner Department of Business and Professional Regulation on June 10, 2008, and, if so, what disciplinary action should be taken against her Florida real estate appraiser certification.Respondent did not exercise reasonable diligence in developing an appraisal, failed to maintain adequate record, failed to comply with Uniform Standards, and is guilty of culpable negligence" and "breach of trust."