IRVING Z. MANN, I. Z. MANN REALTY CORPORATION AND STANLEY M. ROBBINS, APPELLANTS,
v.
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 Florida Real Estate Commission suspended appellants' real estate licenses for ninety days based on their alleged involvement in the non-payment of commissions to a salesman. The appellate court reversed the suspension, finding that the facts did not support a violation of the applicable statute.
The appellate court held that even assuming the appellants' dealings with the salesman fell within the Commission's regulatory authority, the findings of fact did not support a violation of Section 475.25(1)(a), and therefore the suspension was reversed and the administrative complaint was dismissed with prejudice.
[1] A real estate commission cannot suspend licenses based on findings of fact that do not support a violation of the relevant statute.
[2] A licensed real estate broker is not liable for the debts of an independent corporation that failed to pay commissions to a salesman, even if the broker is an officer of…
Previewing 2 of 3 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“Even if the acts or dealings of these appellants with the salesman come within the purview of the commission's regulatory authority, the findings of fact will not support a violation of Section 475.25(l)(a), Florida Statutes.”
The court's holding that the facts do not establish a statutory violation even under a broad interpretation of the Commission's authority.
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceA licensed real estate salesman was hired by a condominium development corporation that was short of cash. The salesman was informed he would wait ind…
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.
OTT, Judge.
The Florida Real Estate Commission suspended appellants’ licenses for ninety days and they appeal. We reverse.
In ordering the suspensions the Commission adopted the findings of fact made by the hearing officer, but rejected his recommendation that the charges against appellants should be dismissed.
The essential findings of fact established that a licensed real estate salesman was hired by a corporation that was developing and selling condominium units. The salesman was informed that the hiring corporation was short of cash and that he would be required to wait an indefinite time before being paid any commissions he might earn. The corporation ultimately became insolvent and folded, still owing some $3,000 in commissions to the salesman for three sales he had closed but which produced no money at all for the corporation or its officers. Two of its officers continued to assure the salesman that he would get paid eventually. Those two officers were licensed real estate brokers who operated a licensed real estate brokerage corporation which was completely independent of the condominium corporation and was in no way involved in the deal with the salesman. The two officers and the realty corporation (all licensees) are the appellants.
Even if the acts or dealings of these appellants with the salesman come within the purview of the commission’s regulatory authority, the findings of fact will not support a violation of Section 475.25(l)(a), Florida Statutes. See Brod v. Jernigan, 188 So. 2d 575 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966); Cannon v. Florida Real Estate Commission, 221 So. 2d 240 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969); Horne v. Florida Real Estate Commission, 163 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964).
The order of suspension is reversed with instructions to the Commission to dismiss [*DCCXCVI] the administrative complaint against appellants with prejudice.
HOBSON, Acting C. J., and RYDER, J., concur.
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Brod v. Jernigan, 188 So. 2d 575 (Fla. 2d DCA 1966)
- Cannon v. Fla. Real Est. Comm'n & Charles A. Boyd, Jr., 221 So. 2d 240 (Fla. 4th DCA 1969)
- Horne v. The Fla. Real Est. Comm'n & Earle L. Mann, 163 So. 2d 515 (Fla. 1st DCA 1964)