Legal Opinion
Federman v. State, Department of Business Regulation, Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering
District Court of Appeal of Florida
Decided May 18, 1982No. Nos. 81-540, 81-541, 81-542 and 81-543PublishedCited by 5 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
SCHWARTZ, Judge.
The appellant Federman is a licensed horse trainer. He appeals from two orders of the Division of Administrative Hearings upholding the validity of rules promulgated by the Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering and two orders of the Division itself imposing discipline upon him for violation of those rules. We affirm.
For the most part, the legal issues Feder-man raises have already been directly and recently decided against him. Solimena v. State of Florida, Department of Business Regulation, Division of Pari-Mutuel Wagering, 402 So.2d 1240 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981), review denied, 412…
2Cases cited6 opinions
- Solimena v. State, Dept. of Business Reg.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1981
- Lanchester v. Pennsylvania State Horse Racing CommissionCommonwealth Court of Pennsylvania · 1974
- Major v. StateDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1980
- Euster v. Pennsylvania State Horse Racing CommissionDistrict Court, E.D. Pennsylvania · 1977
- Calfin v. STATE, DEPT. OF BUSINESS REGULATIONDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1980
1 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by5 opinions
- Cushing v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of DentistryDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1982
- Pullin v. Louisiana State Racing Com'nSupreme Court of Louisiana · 1985
- Bludworth v. ArcuriDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1982
- Cushing v. DEPT. OF PROF. REG., ETC.District Court of Appeal of Florida · 1982
- DEPT. OF BUSINESS v. Calder Race CourseDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida · 1998