welcome to elawyers.us
Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
  1. Home
  2. Find a Lawyer
  6. Robert Minarcin
Robert Minarcin
Robert Minarcin
Visitors: 48
0
Bar #163147(FL)     License for 25 years
Orlando FL

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

Related Laws :

Florida Laws: 120.52, 120.56, 120.569, 120.57, 120.60, 120.68, 20.04, 20.165, 455.225, 455.227, 455.2273, 465.0251, 475.021, 475.25, 475.611, 475.613, 475.6221, 475.6222, 475.623, 475.624, 475.625, 475.626, 475.628, 475.629, 57.111, 627.8405, 90.702, 92.38

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

08-003898PL  DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs ANDREW S. MELTZER  (2008)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 12, 2008
Whether the Respondent, Andrew S. Meltzer, committed the violations alleged in the Administrative Complaint involving the standards for the development of or the communication of real estate appraisals and, if so, what penalty should be imposed.Respondent failed to review entire sales contract, including addendum for seller`s concessions, failed to report complete MLS history, and made other errors and omissions in violation and USPAP. Recommend a 30-day suspension, probation, fine and costs.
09-006824PL  DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs WILLIAM WOODS  (2009)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Dec. 17, 2009
The issues to be determined are whether Respondents violated the provisions of Section 475.624, Florida Statutes (2007), and Florida Administrative Code Rule 61J1-7.001, as charged in the Administrative Complaints, and if so, what penalty should be imposed?Petitioner did not prove the allegations in the Amended Administrative Complaints by clear and convincing evidence. Recommend dismissal.
09-006822PL  DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs FRED CATCHPOLE  (2009)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Dec. 17, 2009
The issues to be determined are whether Respondents violated the provisions of Section 475.624, Florida Statutes (2007), and Florida Administrative Code Rule 61J1-7.001, as charged in the Administrative Complaints, and if so, what penalty should be imposed?Petitioner did not prove the allegations in the Amended Administrative Complaints by clear and convincing evidence. Recommend dismissal.
09-000700PL  DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs FRED R. CATCHPOLE  (2009)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Feb. 11, 2009
The issue presented is whether Respondent Fred R. Catchpole is guilty of the allegations contained in the Amended Administrative Complaint filed against him, and, if so, what disciplinary action should be taken against him, if any.Petitioner failed to prove that Respondent's appraiser trainees were located other than in the county of Respondent's primary business address or a contiguous county or that they did not have the same business address as Respondent.
11-001321PL  DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs JAY ALAN WHITHAM  (2011)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 14, 2011
In this disciplinary proceeding, the issues are: (1) Whether Respondent committed the violations alleged in the Amended Administrative Complaint issued by the Petitioner; and (2) Whether disciplinary penalties should be imposed on Respondent if Petitioner proves one or more of the violations charged in its Amended Administrative Complaint.Petitioner failed to provide a factual predicate for the alleged violations.
08-002721PL  DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs KATHLEEN GREEN  (2008)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 09, 2008
The issue is whether either Respondent committed the violations alleged in Counts I through VIII of their respective Administrative Complaints.Petitioner alleged violations of statute addressing the discipline of real estate appraisers. Held: Respondents failed to adequately document adjustments made to their appraisal report.
08-002722PL  DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs LEE ANN MOODY  (2008)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 09, 2008
The issue is whether either Respondent committed the violations alleged in Counts I through VIII of their respective Administrative Complaints.Petitioner alleged violations of statute addressing the discipline of real estate appraisers. Held: Respondents failed to adequately document adjustments made to their appraisal report.
09-006823PL  DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs GWENDOLYN BARKER  (2009)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Dec. 17, 2009
Whether Fred Catchpole and Gwendolyn Barker (Respondents) should be subject to disciplinary action as licensed residential real estate appraisers by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Division of Real Estate (Petitioner) for failure to exercise reasonable diligence in developing an appraisal report in violation of Section 475.623(15), Florida Statutes (2004).1/Petitioner did not show by clear and convincing evidence that Respondents failed to use reasonable diligence in developing a real estate appraisal report.
09-006821PL  DEPARTMENT OF BUSINESS AND PROFESSIONAL REGULATION, DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs FRED R. CATCHPOLE  (2009)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Dec. 17, 2009
Whether Fred Catchpole and Gwendolyn Barker (Respondents) should be subject to disciplinary action as licensed residential real estate appraisers by the Department of Business and Professional Regulation, Division of Real Estate (Petitioner) for failure to exercise reasonable diligence in developing an appraisal report in violation of Section 475.623(15), Florida Statutes (2004).1/Petitioner did not show by clear and convincing evidence that Respondents failed to use reasonable diligence in developing a real estate appraisal report.
09-003947PL  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 Administrative Complaint dated March 13, 2009, and, if so, the penalty that should be imposed.Petitioner failed to prove Respondent appraiser committed breach of trust or culpable negligence in preparing appraisal report; although proof sufficient to establish violation of USPAP recordkeeping rule, USPAP 2006 could not be used to prove violation.

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