[RPPTL-constructionlaw] 489.128 Fla. Stat. &failure to have a certificate of authority

[fred.dudley at hklaw.com]

Do you think the practice of law should also be regulated as you have described?

Frederick Dudley | Holland & Knight
Board Certified Construction Lawyer
315 South Calhoun Street, Suite 600 | Tallahassee FL 32301

Phone 850.425.5668 | Fax 850.224.8832 | Cell 850.294.3471

fred.dudley at hklaw.com <mailto:fred.dudley at hklaw.com>  | www.hklaw.com <http://www.hklaw.com/>
--------------------------
Sent from my BlackBerry Wireless Handheld


----- Original Message -----
From: Tina Caraballo [mailto:TCaraballo at const-law.com]
Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2011 07:46 AM
To: RPPTL constructionlaw <constructionlaw at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [RPPTL-constructionlaw] 489.128 Fla.       Stat.   &failure        to      have    a       certificate of authority

Obviously this is not the preferred method and all contractors should complete the required paperwork.  While the contractor may be subject to discipline, it should not lose the ability to enforce its contract.  This is a core question of the role and purpose of the CILB.  Do we want to bring contractors under the regulation umbrella or do we want to just say you made a mistake on your paperwork so you lose that $500000 contract claim and we don't care that you went out of business?    Under the prior cases it was held to be a factual determination of whether the qualifier actually met the definition.  In most instances the business organization was properly qualified, but after the date of the contract.  Isn't it more appropriate for that contractor to be disciplined by the Board and continue to operate?
Sent via BlackBerry by AT&T

-----Original Message-----
From: "Gibbons, Michael" <Michael.Gibbons at lowndes-law.com>
Sender: <constructionlaw-bounces at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Date: Mon, 14 Nov 2011 18:48:32
To: RPPTL constructionlaw<constructionlaw at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Reply-To: RPPTL constructionlaw <constructionlaw at lists.flabarrpptl.org>
Subject: Re: [RPPTL-constructionlaw] 489.128 Fla. Stat.
        &failure        to      have    a       certificate of authority

_______________________________________________
constructionlaw mailing list
constructionlaw at lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/constructionlaw

_______________________________________________
constructionlaw mailing list
constructionlaw at lists.flabarrpptl.org
http://mailman.fsr.com/mailman/listinfo/constructionlaw

________________________________

****IRS CIRCULAR 230 DISCLOSURE: TO ENSURE COMPLIANCE WITH REQUIREMENTS IMPOSED BY THE IRS, WE INFORM YOU THAT ANY TAX ADVICE CONTAINED IN THIS COMMUNICATION (INCLUDING ANY ATTACHMENTS) IS NOT INTENDED OR WRITTEN BY HOLLAND & KNIGHT LLP TO BE USED, AND CANNOT BE USED, FOR THE PURPOSE OF (I) AVOIDING TAX-RELATED PENALTIES UNDER THE INTERNAL REVENUE CODE, OR (II) PROMOTING, MARKETING, OR RECOMMENDING TO ANOTHER PARTY ANY TAX-RELATED MATTER HEREIN.****

________________________________

NOTE: This e-mail is from a law firm, Holland & Knight LLP (“H&K”), and is intended solely for the use of the individual(s) to whom it is addressed. If you believe you received this e-mail in error, please notify the sender immediately, delete the e-mail from your computer and do not copy or disclose it to anyone else. If you are not an existing client of H&K, do not construe anything in this e-mail to make you a client unless it contains a specific statement to that effect and do not disclose anything to H&K in reply that you expect it to hold in confidence. If you properly received this e-mail as a client, co-counsel or retained expert of H&K, you should maintain its contents in confidence in order to preserve the attorney-client or work product privilege that may be available to protect confidentiality.