380 B.R. 602 (2007) In re Steven J. MATTHEWS and Tina A. Matthews, Debtor. No. 8:04-bk-24146-PMG. United States Bankruptcy Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division. March 28, 2007. *603 Benjamin G. Martin, Law Offices of Benjamin Martin, Sarasota, FL, for Debtor. ORDER ON DEBTORS' MOTION FOR RECONSIDERATION OF ORDER ON MOTION TO COMPEL TURNOVER OF 2004 INCOME TAX REFUND PAUL M. GLENN, Chief Judge. THIS CASE came before the Court for hearing to consider the Motion for Reconsideration *604 of Order on M..
The issue is whether the Petitioner forfeited his retirement benefits due to criminal convictions.Petitioner was convicted of felonies related to his employment and forfeited his FRS benefits.
The issues to be determined are whether Meie L. Crisp, L.M.T., Respondent, engaged in sexual misconduct in the practice of massage therapy, in violation of section 480.046(1)(o), Florida Statutes (2012), through a violation of section 480.0485, Florida Statutes (2012); and, if so, what is the appropriate sanction.Petitioner presented clear and convincing evidence that Respondent committed sexual misconduct in the practice of massage therapy. Recommend $1,000 fine and revocation.
The issues are essentially whether Respondent failed to use reasonable diligence on four appraisals of residential condominiums in Orlando done in 2007, and whether he failed to register his appraisal business with Petitioner; and, if so, how he should be disciplined.Real estate appraiser used inappropriate comparables, did not use reasonable diligence, and arrived at unreasonably high value conclusions.
The issues are essentially whether Respondent failed to use reasonable diligence on four appraisals of residential condominiums in Orlando done in 2007, and whether he failed to register his appraisal business with Petitioner; and, if so, how he should be disciplined.Real estate appraiser used inappropriate comparables, did not use reasonable diligence, and arrived at unreasonably high value conclusions.
The issues are essentially whether Respondent failed to use reasonable diligence on four appraisals of residential condominiums in Orlando done in 2007, and whether he failed to register his appraisal business with Petitioner; and, if so, how he should be disciplined.Real estate appraiser used inappropriate comparables, did not use reasonable diligence, and arrived at unreasonably high value conclusions.
The issues are essentially whether Respondent failed to use reasonable diligence on four appraisals of residential condominiums in Orlando done in 2007, and whether he failed to register his appraisal business with Petitioner; and, if so, how he should be disciplined.Real estate appraiser used inappropriate comparables, did not use reasonable diligence, and arrived at unreasonably high value conclusions.
