welcome to elawyers.us
Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
  1. Home
  2. Find a Lawyer
  6. Timothy N Tack
Timothy N Tack
Timothy N Tack
Visitors: 39
0
Bar #51829(FL)     License for 29 years; Member in Good Standing
Lutz FL

Are you Timothy N Tack? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

18-4472  Kevin Osgood v. State of Florida  (2019)
District Court of Appeal of Florida Filed: Oct. 17, 2019
FIRST DISTRICT COURT OF APPEAL STATE OF FLORIDA _ No. 1D18-4472 _ KEVIN OSGOOD, Appellant, v. STATE OF FLORIDA, Appellee. _ On appeal from the Circuit Court for Duval County. Tatiana Salvador, Judge. October 17, 2019 PER CURIAM. AFFIRMED. B.L. THOMAS, ROBERTS, and OSTERHAUS, JJ., concur. _ Not final until disposition of any timely and authorized motion under Fla. R. App. P. 9.330 or 9.331. _ Kevin Osgood, pro se, Appellant. Ashley Moody, Attorney General, Tallahassee, for Appellee. 2
19-005529  PAULETTE LEWIS vs OAKMONTE VILLAGE  (2019)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Oct. 15, 2019
The issue in this case is whether Respondent, Oakmonte Village, committed an unlawful employment practice against Petitioner, Paulette 1 All statutory references are to Florida Statutes (2019). Relevant provisions of chapter 760 have been unchanged since 2015, prior to any allegedly discriminatory acts. Lewis (Ms. Lewis or Petitioner), on the basis of her race, color, national origin, marital status, religion, age, and/or in retaliation for engaging in a protected activity, in violation of the Florida Civil Rights Act (FCRA).Petitioner failed to establish that she was discriminated against based on her race, color, national origin, marital status, religion, age, or that she was retaliated against for engaging in a protected activity.
17-002568  D'SHANTE L. LEBEAUX vs THE MELTDOWN ON 30A  (2017)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 02, 2017
Whether Respondent, The Meltdown on 30A (“The Meltdown”), discriminated against Petitioners, D’Shante L. LeBeaux, Erin M. Scott, and Latanya M. Scott (collectively, the “Petitioners”), in violation of the Florida Human Rights Act; and, if so, what penalty should be imposed?Petitioners failed to prove even a prima facie case to support their claims of discrimination.
17-003083  ERIN M. SCOTT vs THE MELTDOWN ON 30A  (2017)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 23, 2017
Whether Respondent, The Meltdown on 30A (“The Meltdown”), discriminated against Petitioners, D’Shante L. LeBeaux, Erin M. Scott, and Latanya M. Scott (collectively, the “Petitioners”), in violation of the Florida Human Rights Act; and, if so, what penalty should be imposed?Petitioners failed to prove even a prima facie case to support their claims of discrimination.
17-003084  LATANYA M. SCOTT vs THE MELTDOWN ON 30A  (2017)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 23, 2017
Whether Respondent, The Meltdown on 30A (“The Meltdown”), discriminated against Petitioners, D’Shante L. LeBeaux, Erin M. Scott, and Latanya M. Scott (collectively, the “Petitioners”), in violation of the Florida Human Rights Act; and, if so, what penalty should be imposed?Petitioners failed to prove even a prima facie case to support their claims of discrimination.
15-001871  JACQUELINE ASH vs PACIFICA SENIOR LIVING WOODMONT  (2015)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Apr. 07, 2015
Whether Petitioner was subject to an unlawful employment practice by Respondent, Pacifica Senior Living Woodmont, on account of Petitioner’s age or race, in violation of section 760.10, Florida Statutes.Petitioner failed to prove a prima facie case of employment discrimination based on either age or race.
14-004578  JANET D. MAYES vs GREAT SOUTHERN CAFE  (2014)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Oct. 02, 2014
The issue in this proceeding is whether the Respondent committed an unlawful employment practice against Petitioner in violation of the Florida Civil Rights Act.Evidence did not demonstrate Petitioner had disability (OCS, anxiety, etc.) or perceived disability. Evidence did not show sex discrimination. Terminated for a legitimate reason.
08-001456  JUDY A. SOREY vs MASTERCORP, INC.  (2008)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 24, 2008
The issue is whether Respondent engaged in an unlawful employment practice with regard to Petitioner.Petitioner complained she was discharged because of her race and that a coffee mug given to her insulted her because of her race. It was found that the mug was a symbol of a Puerto Rican festival and was not insulting to any race. She was not discharged.

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