Legal Opinion

Hartman-Tyner, Inc. v. Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering, Department of Business & Professional Regulation

District Court of Appeal of Florida

Decided March 17, 2006No. 1D05-5430Published

1Opinion of the CourtLewis, J.

Petitioners, each of which is a pari-mu-tuel wagering permit holder licensed by respondent, the Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering, Department of Business and Professional Regulation (“Division”), petition for review of an emergency rule adopted by the Division, which repeals Florida Administrative Code Rule 61D-11.027.1 Petitioners argue that the Divi*561sion’s findings of an immediate danger to the public health, safety, or welfare, upon which emergency rule 61DER05-1 is based, are insufficient to justify emergency rulemaking pursuant to section 120.54(4), Florida Statutes (2005). Because we…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Florida Home Builders Ass'n v. Division of LaborDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1978
  2. Little v. ColerDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1990
  3. Florida Health Care v. Agency Health CareDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1998
  4. Florida Democratic Party v. HoodDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 2004
  5. Department of Business and Professional Regulation v. Calder Race Course, Inc.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 2005

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API