Escambia FL Estate planning, Litigation and Real estate Lawy -- eLawyers

16-5532 Omar A. Cummings v. State of Florida (2018)

District Court of Appeal of Florida Filed: Apr. 06, 2018

FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _ No. 1D16-5532 _ OMAR A. CUMMINGS, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. _ On appeal from the Circuit Court for Okaloosa County. John T. Brown, Judge. April 6, 2018 PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. ROWE, RAY, and MAKAR, JJ., concur. _ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _ Andy Thomas, Public Defender, and Steven L. Seliger, Assistant Public Defender, Tallahassee, for Appellant. Pamela Jo Bo..

17-1013 JAY GOODLEY v. GERALDINE SWARTZ and CATHERINE KOLEN (2018)

District Court of Appeal of Florida Filed: Feb. 15, 2018

DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FOURTH DISTRICT JAY GOODLEY, Appellant, v. GERALDINE SWARTZ, individually, and CATHERINE KOLEN, individually, Appellees. No. 4D17-1013 [February 15, 2018] Appeal from the Circuit Court for the Seventeenth Judicial Circuit, Broward County; Mark Alan Speiser, Judge; L.T. Case No. MHC16- 0000819. Jay Goodley, Hollywood, pro se. Ellen S. Morris of Elder Law Associates PA, Boca Raton, for appellees. PER CURIAM. Affirmed. CIKLIN, LEVINE and KLINGENSMITH,..

17-0300 Rios v. Miami's Garage, Inc. (2017)

District Court of Appeal of Florida Filed: Apr. 26, 2017

Third District Court of Appeal State of Florida Opinion filed April 26, 2017. Not final until disposition of timely filed motion for rehearing. _ No. 3D17-300 Lower Tribunal No. 14-30412 _ Jorge Rios, Appellant, vs. Miami's Garage, Inc., a Florida Corporation, and Professional Lien and Title Service Corp., a Florida Corporation, Appellees. An Appeal from a non-final order from the Circuit Court for Miami-Dade County, Jose M. Rodriguez, Judge. Law Offices of Yoder & Ohanian, LLC, and Sebastian Oha..

5D16-2947 Alston v. Haines (2017)

District Court of Appeal of Florida Filed: May 01, 2017

IN THE DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL OF THE STATE OF FLORIDA FIFTH DISTRICT NOT FINAL UNTIL TIME EXPIRES TO FILE MOTION FOR REHEARING AND DISPOSITION THEREOF IF FILED OMAR T. ALSTON, Appellant, v. Case No. 5D16-2947 SHEIMIRA HAINES, Appellee. _/ Opinion filed May 5, 2017 Appeal from the Circuit Court for Marion County, S. Sue Robbins, Judge. Omar T. Alston, Monticello, pro se. No Appearance for Appellee. PER CURIAM. Omar Alston appeals the summary denial of his motion to vacate an injunction against r..

1D10-4927 Davis v. State (2010)

District Court of Appeal of Florida Filed: Nov. 08, 2010 Citations: 48 So. 3d 839

48 So. 3d 839 (2010) DAVIS v. STATE. No. 1D10-4927. District Court of Appeal of Florida, First District. November 8, 2010. DECISION WITHOUT PUBLISHED OPINION Affirmed.

18-24346 Rolando Soca and Tania Fernandez Fidalgo (1982)

United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida Filed: Apr. 27, 1982 Citations: 19 B.R. 601

19 B.R. 601 (1982) In the Matter of LACKOW BROTHERS, INC., Debtor. William ROEMELMEYER and Jeanette Tavormina, as Co-Trustees, Plaintiffs, v. WALTER E. HELLER & COMPANY SOUTHEAST, INC., Defendant. Bankruptcy No. 81-00485-BKC-SMW, Adv. No. 82-0135-BVKC-SMW-A. United States Bankruptcy Court, S.D. Florida. April 27, 1982. *602 Britton, Cohen, Kaufman, Benson & Schantz, Miami, Fla., for defendants. Irving Wolff, Miami, Fla., for plaintiffs. Louis Phillips, Miami, Fla., for creditors committee. Willia..

18-006195RU RENAISSANCE CHARTER SCHOOL, INC. vs THE SCHOOL BOARD OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA (2018)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Nov. 19, 2018

The issues to be decided are: (i) whether Respondent's interpretation of section 1006.12, Florida Statutes——namely, that charter school operators such as Petitioner, rather than school boards and superintendents, are obligated to assign "safe-school officers" to police charter school facilities—— constitutes an unadopted rule; (ii) whether Respondent's form, which solicits information from charter schools regarding their safe-school officers, constitutes an unadopted rule; and (iii) whether Respondent's denial of Petitioner's request for the assignment of safe-school officers to its charter schools constitutes inequitable treatment of charter schools as public schools.School Board's interpretation of section 1006.12 and its form requesting information on safe-school officers constitute unadopted rules; denial of charter school's request for such officers constitutes inequitable treatment of charter schools.

16-005126 RENAISSANCE CHARTER SCHOOL, INC. vs THE SCHOOL BOARD OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA (2016)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 07, 2016

Whether the School Board lacked the delegated legislative authority to promulgate School Board Policy 2.57. Whether the challenged portions of School Board Policy 2.57 violate certain provisions of the charter school statute, section 1002.33, Florida Statutes, and State Board Rules, as outlined in Petitioner's Amended Rule Challenge Petitions. Whether the Innovative Rubric Policy 2.57 should be invalidated for enlarging, modifying, and/or contravening the charter statute and also the adopted State Board Education rule(s) and form(s). Whether the budget worksheet referenced in School Board Policy 2.57 is an unadopted rule because it was not attached or incorporated into School Board Policy 2.57 and/or was never specifically adopted by rule. Whether certain provisions of School Board Policy 2.57 violate section 1002.33(6)(h) as outlined in Petitioner's Amended Rule Challenge and Charter Petitions. Whether the prevailing party is entitled to attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to section 1002.33(6)(h) and/or section 120.595, Florida Statutes.School Board Policy 2.57 found valid. Portions of the May 27, 2015, amendments to policy 2.57 invalid in violation of section 120.52(8)(c). Petitioner failed to demonstrate violation of 1002.33(6)(h).

16-005157RX RENAISSANCE CHARTER SCHOOL, INC. vs THE SCHOOL BOARD OF PALM BEACH COUNTY, FLORIDA (2016)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Sep. 07, 2016

Whether the School Board lacked the delegated legislative authority to promulgate School Board Policy 2.57. Whether the challenged portions of School Board Policy 2.57 violate certain provisions of the charter school statute, section 1002.33, Florida Statutes, and State Board Rules, as outlined in Petitioner's Amended Rule Challenge Petitions. Whether the Innovative Rubric Policy 2.57 should be invalidated for enlarging, modifying, and/or contravening the charter statute and also the adopted State Board Education rule(s) and form(s). Whether the budget worksheet referenced in School Board Policy 2.57 is an unadopted rule because it was not attached or incorporated into School Board Policy 2.57 and/or was never specifically adopted by rule. Whether certain provisions of School Board Policy 2.57 violate section 1002.33(6)(h) as outlined in Petitioner's Amended Rule Challenge and Charter Petitions. Whether the prevailing party is entitled to attorneys' fees and costs pursuant to section 1002.33(6)(h) and/or section 120.595, Florida Statutes.School Board Policy 2.57 found valid. Portions of the May 27, 2015, amendments to policy 2.57 invalid in violation of section 120.52(8)(c). Petitioner failed to demonstrate violation of 1002.33(6)(h).

14-003267 RENAISSANCE CHARTER SCHOOL, INC., AND RENAISSANCE CHARTER SCHOOL AT TRADITION vs ST. LUCIE COUNTY SCHOOL BOARD (2014)

Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 15, 2017

Whether Petitioners, Renaissance Charter School, Inc., and Renaissance Charter School at Tradition, can be required by the St. Lucie County School Board ("School Board") to offer regular school busing to all eligible charter school students residing more than two miles from the charter school. Whether Petitioner, Renaissance Charter School at Tradition, breached its contract with the School Board by not providing transportation to students in accord with the parties' charter school contract and Florida Statutes. Whether School Board Policies 3.90 and 8.31 constitute an invalid exercise of delegated legislative authority. Whether the School Board has charter busing policies which amount to illegal, unadopted rules under chapter 120, Florida Statutes (2014).Charter school is not required to offer regular school busing to all students residing more than two miles from the charter school, and Charter School did not breach its charter or violate Florida law by failing to offer such school busing.

Stephanie Alexander