LLERA REALTY, INC., J. M. LLERA, CORAL REALTY CORP. AND ALBERTO TRELLES, APPELLANTS,
v.
BOARD OF REAL ESTATE (FORMERLY FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION), APPELLEE
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
The court held that the Florida Real Estate Commission's suspension of real estate brokers' licenses for filing a notice of lis pendens to collect a commission was not an unreasonable classification and did not violate their right of access to the courts.
[1] A statute prohibiting real estate brokers and salesmen from filing a notice of lis pendens to collect a commission is not an unreasonable classification that deprives the…
[2] Real estate brokers and salesmen are subject to a higher standard of conduct due to their privileged position and intimate connection with real estate transactions.
Previewing 2 of 4 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceReal estate brokers filed a notice of lis pendens on property in an action to recover a commission. The Florida Real Estate Commission charged them wi…
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Florida Real Estate Recovery Fund cases and more on FLexlaw
PEARSON, TILLMAN (Ret.), Associate Judge.
This appeal by respondents Llera Realty, Inc., J. M. Llera, Coral Realty Corp. and Alberto Trelles is brought to review the administrative decision of the Florida Real Estate Commission (now known as the Board of Real Estate), which suspended the licenses of the respondents for thirty days. The complaint filed by the Commission charged that the respondents had violated Section 475.42(l)(j), Florida Statutes (1977), by filing a notice of lis pendens on real estate in a court action brought to recover a real estate commission.1
The hearing officer entered a recommended order finding that the respondents had, in fact, recorded a lis pendens on real estate in order to collect the commission, and concluding that as a matter of law, the cited section was unconstitutional as applied in this case because “[o]n its face and without such limitations, the statute has a chilling effect on the right of the broker or salesman to seek redress in the courts because persons subject to the statute may have their license revoked or suspended and be prosecuted criminally.”
The Commission rejected that portion of the hearing officer’s conclusions of law which held the application of the statute to the respondents to be unconstitutional and, accordingly, the respondents were found guilty and their license suspended for thirty days. We affirm.
The only substantial question argued in this court is whether the classification by the statute of real estate brokers and salesmen as a class of persons who may not use the filing of a lis pendens in connection with a civil lawsuit filed in order to collect a real estate commission is a classification so unreasonable that it amounts to a deprivation of the right of brokers and salesmen of free access to the courts. It is apparent that the classification is not unreasonable because real estate brokers and salesmen are privileged by the statutory law of this state in the collection of commissions. Section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1977), in effect, provides that only a real estate broker who is properly registered “. . .at the time the act or service was performed” may maintain a court action for the collection of a commission for the sale of real estate. As stated in Quinn v. Phipps, 93 Fla. 805, 113 So. 419, 425 (1927), with regard to the real estate business, “No business known to modern society has a longer or more respectable history.” In this regard, the statutory law of this state demands a high standard of those engaging in the real estate business. Sections 475.17 et seq., Florida Statutes (1977), place a high standard on applicants for registration as real estate brokers or salesmen; Section 475.25, Florida Statutes (1977), through the onus of revocation or suspension of registration, demands an exemplary level of behavior within the profession; Section 475.42, Florida Statutes (1977), enumerates various violations and the consequent penalties to be exacted against those who are not properly registered; and Sections 475.482 et seq., by creating the Florida Real Estate Recovery Fund to reimburse persons who have suffered monetary damages at the hands of those registered under this chapter, demonstrate this state’s recognition of the sensitive and privileged position of those engaged in real estate to the public at large. Furthermore, it is well-established by the case law of this state that real estate brokers and salesmen occupy a position of confidence toward the public. See the discussion in Foulk v. Florida Real Estate Commission, 113 So. 2d 714, 717 (Fla.2d DCA 1959). And see Gabel v. Kilgore, 157 Fla. 420, 26 So. 2d 166 (1946); and Ahern v. Florida Real Estate Commission ex rel. O’Kelley, 149 Fla. 706, 6 So. 2d 857 (1942).
The work of real estate brokers and salesmen is intimately connected with the transfer of title to real estate. It is natural that their experience and knowledge in such matters should be greater than that of the people they serve in their profession. The denial to this privileged group of the availability of a lis pendens when used to collect a commission on the sale of the same real estate on which they have secured, or have attempted to secure, the transfer of title is not the denial of a right of access to the courts. It is simply the denial of a special tool which might be misused by some members of this privileged group to the disadvantage of the public.
Finding no error, we affirm the administrative decision.
. § 475.42(l)(j), Fla.Stat. (1977), provides:
“No real estate broker or salesman shall place, or cause to be placed, upon the public records of any county, any contract, assignment, deed, will, mortgage, lien, affidavit, or other writing which purports to affect the title of, or encumber, any real property . maliciously or for the purpose of collecting a commission, or to coerce the payment of money to the broker or salesman or other person, or for any unlawful purpose.”
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Alamagan Corp. v. The Daniels Grp., Inc., 809 So. 2d 22 (Fla. 3d DCA 2002)…agreement. § 475.42(1)©, Fla. Stat. (1999). We disagree with appellants’ analysis. Appellants’ argument relies on the cases of Lake Placid Holding Co. v. Paparone, 414 So. 2d 564 (Fla. 2d DCA 1982), and Llera Realty, Inc. v. Board of Real Estate, 385 So. 2d 1131 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980), for the proposition that pursuant to section 475.42, a real estate broker can not use a lis pendens to collect a real estate commission. These cases, however, were decided prior to the 1985 amendments to section 475.42, which add…
-
Santaniello v. Dep't of Prof'l Regulation/Board of Real Est., 432 So. 2d 82 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983)…t of money to the broker or salesman or other person, or for any unlawful purpose. A broker’s filing of a lis pendens to recover a real estate commission has been held a violation of section 475.42(l)(j). Llera Realty, Inc. v. Board of Real Estate, 385 So. 2d 1131 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). Further, a broker may be disciplined for objectionable conduct in dealing with his own land as contrasted with that of his clients. Sellars v. Florida Real Estate Commission, 380 So. 2d 1052 (Fla. 1st DCA 1980). Likewise, a broke…
-
Atef I. Michel and Sophie T. Michel v. Beau Rivage Beach Resort, Inc., 774 So. 2d 900 (Fla. 4th DCA 2001)…the balance due at closing. Section 475.42(l)(j), Florida Statutes, prohibits a real estate broker or salesman from placing a mortgage in the public records for the purpose of collecting a commission. See Llera Realty, Inc. v. Board of Real Estate, 385 So. 2d 1131 (Fla. 3d DCA 1980). However, the last sentence of section 475.42(1)0) provides that the broker is not “prohibit[ed] ... from placing a lien on a property where expressly permitted by contractual agreement.” Here, Beau Rivage and Chammah agreed to Mi…
Previewing 3 of 5 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceAuthorities Cited
- Porte F. Quinn v. Phipps, 113 So. 419 (Fla. 1927)
- Ahern v. Fla. Real Est. Comm'n Ex Rel. O'Kelley, 6 So.2d 857 (Fla. 1942)
- Foulk v. Fla. Real Est. Comm'n, 113 So. 2d 714 (Fla. 2d DCA 1959)
- Gabel v. Forrest Kilgore, 157 Fla. 420 (Fla. 1946)