UNISOURCE PHARMACEUTICAL GROUP, INC., APPELLANT,
v.
STATE OF FLORIDA, AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION, APPELLEE; R M SERVICES & SUPPLIES, CORP., APPELLANT, V. STATE OF FLORIDA, AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION, APPELLEE; YAKEL MEDICAL EQUIPMENT, CORP., APPELLANT, V. STATE OF FLORIDA, AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION, APPELLEE; S.Y.C. HOME MEDICAL EQUIPMENT, INC., APPELLANT, V. STATE OF FLORIDA, AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION, APPELLEE; OASIS PHARMACY, INC., APPELLANT, V. STATE OF FLORIDA, AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION, APPELLEE; XPRESS LAB, INC., APPELLANT, V. STATE OF FLORIDA, AGENCY FOR HEALTH CARE ADMINISTRATION, APPELLEE
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Formal Administrative Hearing cases and more on FLexlaw
PER CURIAM.
Appellants, Unisource Pharmaceutical Group, Inc., R M Services & Supplies, Corp., Yakel Medical Equipment Corp., S.Y.C. Home Medical Equipment, Inc., Oasis Pharmacy, Inc., and Xpress Lab, Inc., appeal the Final Orders entered by the Agency for Health Care Administration (“AHCA”), dismissing appellants’ petitions for formal hearing under Section 120.57(1), Florida Statutes, for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. Because the petitions filed by appellants fail to allege disputed issues of material fact, and instead appear to raise issues regarding AHCA’s interpretation of section 409.907, Florida Statutes (2000), we affirm the dismissal of the petitions seeking a section 120.57(1) hearing. See § 120.54(5)(b)4., Fla. Stat. (2000) (establishing Uniform Rules of Procedure for the filing of petitions for administrative hearings pursuant to sections 120.569 and 120.57); Fla. Admin. Code R. 59-1.018 (1998) (adopting the Uniform Rules of Procedure); see also § 120.569(2)(c), Fla. Stat. (2000) (“Unless otherwise provided by law, a petition or request for hearing shall include those items required by the uniform rules adopted pursuant to s. 120.54(5)(b)4.”).
AFFIRMED.
ERVIN, DAVIS and VAN NORTWICK, JJ., Concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Seacor Island Lines, LLC v. Dep't of Bus. & Prof'l Reg. (Fla. 1st DCA 2020)…Fla. 1st DCA 2020) (noting that a petition for formal hearing was properly denied in part because it raised a legal dispute rather than a disputed issue of material fact); see also Unisource Pharm. Grp., Inc. v. State, Agency for Health Care Admin., 799 So. 2d 333, 333 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (affirming the dismissal of a formal hearing petition because the petitioner only raised issues regarding the agency’s interpretation of a statute). As such, the PRRC did not err in determining Appellants failed to raise a d…
-
Seacor Island Lines, LLC v. Dep't of Bus. & Prof'l Reg. (Fla. 1st DCA 2020)…Fla. 1st DCA 2020) (noting that a petition for formal hearing was properly denied in part because it raised a legal dispute rather than a disputed issue of material fact); see also Unisource Pharm. Grp., Inc. v. State, Agency for Health Care Admin., 799 So. 2d 333, 333 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (affirming the dismissal of a formal hearing petition because the petitioner only raised issues regarding the agency’s interpretation of a statute). As such, the PRRC did not err in determining Appellants failed to raise a d…
-
Seacor Island Lines, LLC v. Dep't of Bus. & Prof'l Reg. (Fla. 1st DCA 2020)…Fla. 1st DCA 2020) (noting that a petition for formal hearing was properly denied in part because it raised a legal dispute rather than a disputed issue of material fact); see also Unisource Pharm. Grp., Inc. v. State, Agency for Health Care Admin., 799 So. 2d 333, 333 (Fla. 1st DCA 2001) (affirming the dismissal of a formal hearing petition because the petitioner only raised issues regarding the agency’s interpretation of a statute). As such, the PRRC did not err in determining Appellants failed to raise a d…