FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION, APPELLANT,
v.
STANLEY H. SPIELER, 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 Florida Real Estate Commission appealed a trial court's declaratory judgment holding that a Florida Bar member's legal education and real estate law experience satisfied the Commission's educational requirements for a real estate salesman's license. The court affirmed, finding that attorneys' legal training adequately substitutes for the Commission's prescribed real estate courses.
A member of The Florida Bar possesses adequate educational qualifications to take the Real Estate Commission's examination for a real estate salesman's license without completing the Commission's prescribed educational courses, based on the attorney's legal education and experience in real estate law practice.
[1] A member of The Florida Bar may be entitled to an equivalency of educational requirements for a real estate salesman's license based on their legal education and experien…
[2] The Real Estate Commission has the authority to establish educational courses and require their satisfactory completion as a condition for obtaining a real estate license…
Previewing 2 of 6 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“Admission to the Bar is granted only after long and arduous study, necessarily embracing the proper conduct of real estate transactions, and the most searching character examination which can be devised. This is the reason for the wise exception contained in F.S. Sec. 475.01(2), F.S.A., supra, which eliminates attorneys-at-law from the operation of the chapter, since their conduct of real estate transactions, and legal transactions of all kinds is controlled by other means.”
This quote from State ex rel. Bodner establishes the foundational principle that bar admission standards adequately regulate attorneys' real estate conduct, supporting the exemption from real estate licensing requirements.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceStanley H. Spieler, a Florida Bar member since 1949, sought a declaratory judgment to determine whether he must complete the Real Estate Commission's …
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 Declaratory Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
CARROLL, Judge.
In an action for declaratory judgment the appellee, a member of The Florida Bar since 1949, sought a determination of whether, for the purpose of application for a real estate salesman’s license or certificate of registration under Chapter 475 Fla.Stat., F.S.A., and the regulations of the Real Estate Commission, the educational requirements specified by the Commission as a condition for an applicant to take the Commission’s examination for such registration, were inapplicable to the plaintiff, because of his status as a member of The Florida Bar. Acting pursuant. to the authority conferred on the Commission by § 475.17(4) Fla.Stat., F.S.A., to establish educational courses and to require satisfactory completion thereof, or of their equivalent, as a condition precedent to a person becoming registered as a real estate broker or salesman, the Commission by its regulation 21V-3.01 had provided that such an applicant, in addition to other legal requirements, must satisfactorily complete certain real estate educational courses prescribed by the Commission, at a state junior college, or other educational institution designated by the Commission. By subsection 3.03 thereof it was provided that as an equivalent to the foregoing, the applicant must have taken and satisfactorily completed “courses covering substantially the same subject matters” at some “accredited degree granting college or university in the State of Florida.”
In the judgment it was recited that the plaintiff had indicated he did not seek to avoid an examination by the Commission as given to applicants for a real estate salesman’s license. The trial court held that the plaintiff’s legal education and his experience in real estate law practice constituted equivalency of the Commission’s requirement as to educational courses which the Commission had imposed.
Appealing therefrom the Commission contends that in so ruling the trial court was in error. We hold no error has been shown, and affirm.
In State ex rel. Bodner v. Florida Real Estate Commission, Fla.1957, 99 So. 2d 582, it was held that an attorney admitted to the practice of law in the State of Florida can perform, without penalty, acts relating to real estate as contained in § 475.01(2) Fla.Stat, F.S.A., but that a practicing lawyer, not licensed as a real estate broker or salesman “cannot advertise for ‘listings’, nor can he solicit business of any kind,” because to do so would be in conflict with prohibitory regulations applicable to members of the Bar. In Tobin v. Courshon, Fla.1963, 155 So. 2d 785, it was held that while a member of the Bar can perform, as legal services for a client (and be remunerated therefor), acts relating to real estate usually performed by brokers or real estate salesmen, a member of the Bar was not entitled to recover commission for real estate services, which were not performed as legal services for a client. And in Tobin the Court rejected the proposition that membership in The Florida Bar would ipso fac-to qualify one to operate as a real estate broker. The conclusion reached by the trial court that a member of The Florida Bar applying to the Commission for registration as a real estate salesman under Chapter 475 possessed adequate educational requirements to entitle the applicant to take the Board’s examination therefor, is supported by the language of the Supreme Court in State ex rel. Bodner v. Florida Real Estate Commission, supra, where the Court said: “Admission to the Bar is granted only after long and arduous study, necessarily embracing the proper conduct of real estate transactions, and the most searching character examination which can be devised. This is the reason for the wise exception contained in F.S. Sec. 475.01(2), F.S.A., supra, which eliminates attorneys-at-law from the operation of the chapter, since their conduct of real estate transactions, and legal transactions of all kinds is controlled by other means.”
The appellee’s cross-assignments of error are held to be without merit.
Judgment is affirmed.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Fla. Real Est. Comm'n v. Spieler, 295 So. 2d 113 (Fla. 1974)…Certiorari denied. 287 So. 2d 701. ADKINS, C. J., and ERVIN, McCAIN and DEKLE, JJ., concur. BOYD, J., dissents.…
Authorities Cited
- State of Fla. ex rel. Charles J. Bodner v. Fla. Real Est. Comm'n, 99 So. 2d 582 (Fla. 1956)
- Tobin v. Courshon, 155 So. 2d 785 (Fla. 1963)