Leon FL Criminal defense, Federal crime and Sex crime Lawyer -- eLawyers

02-004248 AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION vs DELTA HEALTH GROUP, INC., D/B/A BERKSHIRE MANOR (2002)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Oct. 30, 2002

Whether Petitioner was legally justified in issuing a conditional license rating to Respondent.State failed to prove that a fire safety violation created a likelihood of harm to residents.

02-001297F BEVERLY HEALTH AND REHABILITATION SERVICES-PALM BAY vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (2002)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 28, 2002

The issues are whether Petitioner is entitled to recover attorney's fees and costs (fees and costs) pursuant to Section 120.569(2)(e), Florida Statutes (2002); and, if so, what amount of fees and costs is reasonable. (All statutory references are to Florida Statutes (2000)).Party who did not attempt to mitigate fees and costs by providing prompt notice and opportunity to cure pleading allegedly filed for improper purpose is not entitled to fees and costs after hearing.

02-001099 AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION vs BEVERLY ENTERPRISES, INC., FLORIDA, D/B/A VISTA MANOR AND VISTA MANOR HEALTH CARE ASSOCIATES, LLC (2002)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 19, 2002

Whether Vista Manor should have been issued a Conditional license on November 7, 2001, for the alleged failure to provide services and equipment necessary to avoid physical harm to a resident.Single incident, where resident fell and fractured his legs while being moved from his wheelchair to his bed, is insufficient to prove neglect, when policies and procedures were being followed by nursing home.

02-001421 AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION vs DELTA HEALTH GROUP, D/B/A ROSEWOOD MANOR (2002)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 10, 2002

In DOAH Case No. 02-1421, addressing a survey concluded on October 23, 2001, the issue is whether Respondent Delta Health Group, doing business as Rosewood Manor (Rosewood), violated Rule 59A-4.1288, Florida Administrative Code and should be assessed a civil penalty and costs. In DOAH Case Nos. 02-1905 and 02-4040, addressing the survey of January 22 through January 25, 2002, the issue is also whether Rosewood violated Rule 59A-4.1288, Florida Administrative Code. In DOAH Case No. 02-1905, the issue is whether a conditional license should issue. In DOAH Case No. 02-4040, the issue is whether civil penalties and costs should be assessed.AHCA alleged instances of failure to supervise. Evidence demonstrated that no less then 24-hr. observation would suffice and that degree of supervision not required. AHCA alleged facility failed to prevent a pressure sore. No pressure sore was present.

02-001905 AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION vs DELTA HEALTH GROUP, D/B/A ROSEWOOD MANOR (2002)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 09, 2002

In DOAH Case No. 02-1421, addressing a survey concluded on October 23, 2001, the issue is whether Respondent Delta Health Group, doing business as Rosewood Manor (Rosewood), violated Rule 59A-4.1288, Florida Administrative Code and should be assessed a civil penalty and costs. In DOAH Case Nos. 02-1905 and 02-4040, addressing the survey of January 22 through January 25, 2002, the issue is also whether Rosewood violated Rule 59A- 4.1288, Florida Administrative Code. In DOAH Case No. 02-1905, the issue is whether a conditional license should issue. In DOAH Case No. 02-4040, the issue is whether civil penalties and costs should be assessed.AHCA alleged instances of failure to supervise. Evidence demonstrated that no less then 24-hr. observation would suffice and that degree of supervision not required. AHCA alleged facility failed to prevent a pressure sore. No pressure sore was present.

02-004040 AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION vs DELTA HEALTH GROUP, INC., D/B/A ROSEWOOD MANOR (2002)

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

In DOAH Case No. 02-1421, addressing a survey concluded on October 23, 2001, the issue is whether Respondent Delta Health Group, doing business as Rosewood Manor (Rosewood), violated Rule 59A-4.1288, Florida Administrative Code and should be assessed a civil penalty and costs. In DOAH Case Nos. 02-1905 and 02-4040, addressing the survey of January 22 through January 25, 2002, the issue is also whether Rosewood violated Rule 59A- 4.1288, Florida Administrative Code. In DOAH Case No. 02-1905, the issue is whether a conditional license should issue. In DOAH Case No. 02-4040, the issue is whether civil penalties and costs should be assessed.AHCA alleged instances of failure to supervise. Evidence demonstrated that no less then 24-hr. observation would suffice and that degree of supervision not required. AHCA alleged facility failed to prevent a pressure sore. No pressure sore was present.

02-000699 BEVERLY HEALTHCARE EVANS vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (2002)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Feb. 15, 2002

Should Respondent, Agency for Health Care Administration, rate Petitioner's, Beverly Healthcare Evans, nursing home facility license "Conditional" for the 60-day period of January 8 through March 5, 2001, pursuant to Section 400.23(7), Florida Statutes? In particular, did Petitioner commit the acts or omissions alleged in Tags F281, F326, and F426 as determined in Respondent's periodic survey concluded on November 15, 2000? Are Tags F281, F326, and F426 "Class III" deficiencies as defined in Section 400.23(8)(b), Florida Statutes (2000)? Did the results of Respondent's survey concluded on January 8, 2001, reveal "Class III" deficiencies that were uncorrected on or before February 8, 2001, the time specified by Respondent? If so, was Petitioner's "Conditional" rating for the 60-day period of January 8 through March 5, 2001, appropriate?Petitioner failed to correct deficiencies within the specified period. Conditional rating was appropriate.

01-001605 AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION vs BEVERLY HEALTH AND REHABILITATION SERVICES-PALM BAY (2001)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 27, 2001

The issue in this case is whether Respondent committed the allegations in the notice of intent to assign a conditional license and, if so, whether Petitioner should have changed the rating of Respondent's license from standard to conditional for the period March 8 through May 30, 2001.Nursing home did not commit deficiencies alleged in Tags F224, F282, F314, F325, and F363, and agency should not have changed license from Standard to Conditional.

02-000596 AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION vs BEVERLY HEALTHCARE EVANS (2002)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Feb. 15, 2002

The issue in this case is whether Petitioner should change the rating of Respondent's license from standard to conditional.Facility did not fail to provide proper nutritional care to three residents and should have standard license restored.

01-003142 BEVERLY HEALTHCARE OF KISSIMMEE vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION (2001)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 13, 2001

The issue in this case is whether Respondent committed the allegations in the notice of intent to assign a conditional license and, if so, whether Petitioner should have changed the rating of Respondent's license from standard to conditional for the period June 14 through August 10, 2001.Nursing home did not commit deficiencies alleged in Tag F282, and agency should not have changed licensure from Standard to Conditional.

Ryan R. Davis