M.B. v. Agency for Persons With Disabilities

District Court of Appeal of Florida

M.B. v. Agency for Persons With Disabilities

26 So. 3d 666, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 525, 2010 WL 289162

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedJanuary 27, 2010

Docket3D09-962

StatusPublished

This text of 26 So. 3d 666 (M.B. v. Agency for Persons With Disabilities) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

M.B. v. Agency for Persons With Disabilities, 26 So. 3d 666, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 525, 2010 WL 289162 (Fla. Ct. App. 2010).

Pincite

Opinion

SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.

This is an appeal from a final administrative order in favor of the Florida Agency for Persons with Disabilities, upholding its partial denial and reduction of services which had been provided to M.B. for 2008. The ALJ hearing and its result occurred before our decision in M.B. v. Agency for Persons with Disabilities, 13 So.3d 509 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009), which dealt with the same issues as to 2007. Because we find no distinction between the underlying facts and the applicable law as to the two cases, we adopt the opinion and holding of M.B. I and “reverse the previously-allowed three hours per day of ‘additional in-home supports above the live-in rate’ and remand for an allowance of six additional in-home support hours per day; and ... reverse the disallowance of M.B.’s personal emergency response system and artificial tears.” M.B., 13 So.3d at 515. The order under review is otherwise affirmed.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

SCHWARTZ, Senior Judge.

This is an appeal from a final administrative order in favor of the Florida Agency for Persons with Disabilities, upholding its partial denial and reduction of services which had been provided to M.B. for 2008. The ALJ hearing and its result occurred before our decision in M.B. v. Agency for Persons with Disabilities, 13 So.3d 509 (Fla. 3d DCA 2009), which dealt with the same issues as to 2007. Because we find no distinction between the underlying facts and the applicable law as to the two cases, we adopt the opinion and holding of M.B. I and “reverse the previously-allowed three hours per day of ‘additional in-home supports above the live-in rate’ and remand for an allowance of six additional in-home support hours per day; and ... reverse the disallowance of M.B.’s personal emergency response system and artificial tears.” M.B., 13 So.3d at 515. The order under review is otherwise affirmed.

Affirmed in part, reversed in part.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

26 So. 3d 666, 2010 Fla. App. LEXIS 525, 2010 WL 289162, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mb-v-agency-for-persons-with-disabilities-fladistctapp-2010.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack