welcome to elawyers.us
Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
  1. Home
  2. Find a Lawyer
  6. W Robert Vezina III
W Robert Vezina III
W Robert Vezina III
Visitors: 67
0
Bar #329401(FL)     License for 43 years; Member in Good Standing
Tallahassee FL

Are you W Robert Vezina III? Claim this page now or Cliam yourself lawyer page

15-002537BID  LOUIS BERGER GROUP, INC. vs FLORIDA DIVISION OF EMERGENCY MANAGEMENT  (2015)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 06, 2015
On June 4, 2015, an administrative hearing in this case was held in Tallahassee, Florida, before William F. Quattlebaum, Administrative Law Judge, Division of Administrative Hearings.Petitioner does not have substantial interest to be determined in proceeding; therefore, Petition for hearing should be dismissed.
15-001271RP  DAHLIA BARNHART, BY AND THROUGH HER PARENT AND NATURAL GUARDIAN, MORIAH BARNHART vs DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH  (2015)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Mar. 11, 2015
On March 11, 2015, Petitioner Dahlia Barnhart, by and through her parent and natural guardian, Moriah Barnhart (Petitioner), filed a Petition to Challenge Proposed Rule 64-4.002 as [an] Invalid Exercise of Delegated Legislative Authority (Petition).Insufficient facts alleged to show Petitioner would be substantially affected by proposed rule; Petitioner failed to amend Petition. Issues regarding negotiated rule committee and SERC were not cognizable. Petition dismissed for lack of standing.
14-002798BID  XEROX STATE AND LOCAL SOLUTIONS, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF REVENUE  (2014)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 16, 2014
The issue in this proceeding is whether the Respondent's intended award of Invitation to Negotiate (ITN) 13/14-01 was contrary to the Department's governing statutes, rules or policies; contrary to the solicitation specifications; and was clearly erroneous, contrary to competition, arbitrary or capricious.Evidence showed intended ITN award appropriate. Neither statute nor ITN required negotiations to be concluded before intended award posted. Renewal price, unless separately stated, was the proposed contract price.
14-002828BID  CENTURYLINK PUBLIC COMMUNICATIONS, INC., D/B/A CENTURY LINK vs DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS  (2014)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 18, 2014
Is Respondent, Department of Corrections' (Department), Notice of Intent to Award DC RFP-13-031 for Statewide Inmate Telecommunication Services to Intervenor, Global Tel*Link Corporation (Global), contrary to the governing statutes, rules, or policies or to the Department's Request for Proposal solicitation specifications?RFP did not require labeled subsections. Agency arbitrarily ranked responses not marked by subsection s omitted. Allowing 2 bidders to exclude commissions from blended rate when RFP said they must be included was arbitrary and capricious.
14-002894BID  SECURUS TECHNOLOGIES, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS  (2014)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Jun. 18, 2014
Is Respondent, Department of Corrections' (Department), Notice of Intent to Award DC RFP-13-031 for Statewide Inmate Telecommunication Services to Intervenor, Global Tel*Link Corporation (Global), contrary to the governing statutes, rules, or policies or to the Department's Request for Proposal solicitation specifications?RFP did not require labeled subsections. Agency arbitrarily ranked responses not marked by subsection s omitted. Allowing 2 bidders to exclude commissions from blended rate when RFP said they must be included was arbitrary and capricious.
14-002322BID  CUBIC TRANSPORTATION SYSTEMS, INC. vs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION  (2014)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 16, 2014
Whether Respondent Department of Transportation’s intended decision to conduct negotiations with Xerox State and Local Solutions, Inc., under ITN-DOT-13/14-8001-SM is contrary to the Department’s governing statutes, rules, or policies or to the solicitation specifications.The Department's intended decison to conduct negotiations with Xerox State and Local Solutions is not contrary to the Department's governing statutes, rules, policies, or the solicitation specifications.
14-002323BID  ACCENTURE LLP vs DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION  (2014)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: May 16, 2014
Whether Respondent Department of Transportation’s intended decision to conduct negotiations with Xerox State and Local Solutions, Inc., under ITN-DOT-13/14-8001-SM is contrary to the Department’s governing statutes, rules, or policies or to the solicitation specifications.The Department's intended decison to conduct negotiations with Xerox State and Local Solutions is not contrary to the Department's governing statutes, rules, policies, or the solicitation specifications.
13-004113BID  CARE ACCESS PSN, LLC vs AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION  (2013)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Oct. 17, 2013
The issues in this bid protest are whether, in making the decision to award Intervenor Prestige Health Choice, LLC ("Prestige"), a contract to provide Medicaid managed medical assistance services as a provider service network in Region 11 (covering Miami-Dade and Monroe Counties), Respondent Agency for Health Care Administration ("AHCA") acted contrary to a governing statute, rule, or solicitation specification; and, if so, whether such action was clearly erroneous, contrary to competition, arbitrary, or capricious. (In this protest, Petitioner Care Access PSN, LLC ("Care Access"), challenges AHCA's intended award to Prestige in Region 11, and only that award. Care Access does not seek to upset any other intended awards in Region 11 or in any other Region.)The agency's intended contract award, being contrary to the statutes and project specifications, is clearly erroneous and should be rescinded.
13-003028BID  GLOBAL TEL LINK CORPORATION, A DELAWARE CORPORATION vs DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS  (2013)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 15, 2013
Whether the Department of Corrections? action to withdraw its Intent to Award and to reject all replies to ITN 12-DC-8396 is illegal, arbitrary, dishonest, or fraudulent, and if so, whether its Intent to Award is contrary to governing statutes, rules, policies, or the solicitation specifications.Petitioners failed to prove that the Department's rejection of all replies due to unclear criteria for award is illegal, arbitrary, dishonest, or fraudulent.
13-003029BID  EMBARQ PAYPHONE SERVICES, INC., D/B/A CENTURYLINK vs DEPARTMENT OF CORRECTIONS  (2013)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Filed: Aug. 15, 2013
Whether the Department of Corrections? action to withdraw its Intent to Award and to reject all replies to ITN 12-DC-8396 is illegal, arbitrary, dishonest, or fraudulent, and if so, whether its Intent to Award is contrary to governing statutes, rules, policies, or the solicitation specifications.Petitioners failed to prove that the Department's rejection of all replies due to unclear criteria for award is illegal, arbitrary, dishonest, or fraudulent.

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