welcome to elawyers.us
Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
  1. Home
  2. Find a Lawyer
  8. Tiffany Roddenberry
Tiffany Roddenberry
Tiffany Roddenberry
Visitors: 30
0
Bar #92524(FL)     License for 13 years
Tallahassee FL

Are you Tiffany Roddenberry? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

18-001781BID  HARRIS CORPORATION vs DEPARTMENT OF MANAGEMENT SERVICES  (2018)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 05, 2018
The issue to determine in this bid protest matter is whether Respondent’s (Department of Management Services’), intended award of the Statewide Law Enforcement Radio Communications System to Intervenor, Motorola Solutions, Inc., was contrary to its governing statutes, rules, or the solicitation specifications.Petitioner had standing to initiate the bid protest. However, Petitioner failed to prove that the Department's intended award to Intervenor was contrary to its governing statutes, rules, or the solicitation specifications.
18-003806BID  RENAISSANCE POINTE APARTMENTS, LLC vs MIDTOWN LOFTS, LTD., AND FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION  (2018)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jul. 18, 2018
The issue is whether the decision of Respondent Florida Housing Finance Corporation (FHFC) to waive, as a minor irregularity, the failure of Respondent Midtown Lofts, LTD. (Midtown) to disclose in its application for federal low-income housing tax credits (LIHTC) the existence of two occupied dwelling units on the property proposed for development is clearly erroneous, contrary to competition, arbitrary, or capricious (Clearly Erroneous), as provided by section 120.57(3)(f), Florida Statutes.Not clearly erroneous for agency to treat discrepancy as a minor irregularity because it did not confer competitive advantage on applicant.
18-004242BID  SOUTH FLORIDA COMMUNITY CARE NETWORK, LLC, D/B/A COMMUNITY CARE PLAN vs FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH  (2018)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 15, 2018
The issue to be determined in this bid protest matter is whether Respondent Department of Health’s (DOH or the Department) intended award of the contract arising out of Invitation to Negotiate No. DOH-17-026 (ITN) for the Children’s Medical Services Managed Care Plan (CMS Plan) to Intervenor Wellcare of Florida, Inc., d/b/a Staywell Health Plan (Staywell), was contrary to its governing statutes, rules, or the solicitation specifications.Petitioner did not prove that the Department's intended award of the contract to Intervenor was contrary to its governing statutes, rules, or the ITN's specifications.
15-003082BID  THE MIDDLESEX CORPORATION vs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION  (2015)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 28, 2015
The issue in this case is whether the Department of Transportation's (DOT) proposed award of a “design-build” contract to Prince Contracting, LLC (Prince), is contrary to the agency's governing statutes, rules or policies, or the specifications of the Request for Proposals (RFP).Award of contract is contrary to specifications and governing statute.
21-000520BID  TIMSHEL WALTON HOUSING, LLC vs FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION  (2021)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Feb. 12, 2021
The issues to be determined are whether, with respect to each application filed, Florida Housing Finance Corporation’s (Florida Housing) review and decision-making process in response to the Request for Applications 2020-201 (RFA) was contrary to the agency’s governing statutes, the agency’s rules or policies, or the RFA.Florida Housing's determination that two applicants demonstrated committed funding from the same jurisdiction was clearly erroneous; determination that errors in another application were a minor waivable irregularity was supported by evidence.
21-000610BID  ARTHUR MAYS VILLAS PHASE ONE, LLC vs FLORIDA HOUSING FINANCE CORPORATION AND MHP FL I, LLC  (2021)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Feb. 15, 2021
The issue in this bid protest matter is whether Respondent, Florida Housing Finance Corporation's, intended award of funding under Request for Applications 2020-203 was contrary to its governing statutes, rules, or the solicitation specifications.Petitioner failed to prove that Florida Housing’s intended award of housing tax credits is contrary to its governing statutes, rules, or the solicitation specifications.

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