Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change
Find Similar Cases by Filters
You can browse Case Laws by Courts, or by your need.
Find 49 similar cases
FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION vs. PATRICIA A. DENNIS, 84-002551 (1984)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 84-002551 Latest Update: Mar. 20, 1985

Findings Of Fact At all times material to the charges, respondent was a licensed real estate salesman, on inactive status, holding license no. 0330793., and residing in Lake Worth, Florida. In early October, 1983, Jack Barlage entered the offices of Colony Real Estate in Lake Worth, Florida. He was a builder and looking for acreage to purchase. Joyce Adams, a real estate salesman with Colony Real Estate, met with him and, two or three days later, showed him a 5.207 acre tract of land in sunny Urban Meadows, an unrecorded subdivision located west of Loxahatchee, Florida. He expressed an interest in the property; she told him that the owner, Richard Moore, might be willing to sell it. A day or two later, Mr. Barlage called Ms. Adams and asked if she would call owner Moore and obtain a purchase price. She responded that she would not get a commission from selling the property and that he should deal with "Leon," who would be able to contact Mr. Moore, the owner. A day or two later, Ms. Adams introduced Mr. Barlage to "Leon," who was Leon Dennis, respondent's husband--the original developer of Sunny Urban Meadows. This meeting took place at a nearby coffee shop in Royal Palm Beach, called Sandy's. John Adams, Ms. Adams' husband and a real estate salesman, was also present. Respondent did not attend this meeting and there is no evidence that she was, at this point in time, involved in the transaction. This coffee shop meeting was Ms. Adams' last contact with Mr. Barlage, and she had no further involvement in this real estate transaction. A contract for "purchase and sale" of the Sunny Urban Meadows tract was prepared at this meeting and signed by Mr. Barlage, the prospective purchaser. Leon Dennis, respondent's husband, retrieved the form "purchase and sale" contract from his car, returned to the coffee shop, and completed it in the presence of the others. He filled in the terms, including a $28,000 purchase price. He arrived at this figure based on her knowledge of current land values in the area. The form "Brokerage Fee" provision on the bottom of the contract, however, was not filled in; no sales commission was indicated and no broker identified. Mr. Dennis told purchaser Barlage that he would have the contract presented to owner Moore. At that time, Mr. Barlage had not yet had any contacts with respondent, Mr. Dennis's wife. Mr. Dennis, with the help of a relative who was a close friend of Mr. Moore's, then had the contract delivered to Mr. Moore, in Punta Gorda, Florida. Approximately a week earlier, respondent had telephoned Mr. Moore, asking if he wanted to sell the subject property. At that time, a sales commission was not discussed; neither did she represent that she was a licensed real estate salesman or broker. But when the original contract was subsequently delivered to him by Mr. Moore's relative, the "Brokerage Fee" provision had been completed, providing for payment of ten percent of the gross price or $2,800 to Pat Dennis, the respondent. Her name was hand printed above the line labeled, "Name of Broker." Upon receiving the contract and discovering the sales commission, Mr. Moore telephoned respondent and told her that he would not pay a ten percent commission--he said he would agree only to a six percent commission, to be split between her and his own real estate brokerage firm. He also told her that if those terms were not acceptable to her, he "would go ahead and do it without her and give-her her money after the deal was done." (TR-21) Mr. Moore then arranged to meet directly with Mr. Barlage, the prospective purchaser. On October 9, 1983, Mr. Barlage drove to Punta Gorda and met Mr. Moore in a hospital parking lot to finalize the contract. Mr. Moore, noting the "Brokerage Fee" provision, said "Who are these people?" and "Well, I'll take care of them," or words to that effect, (TR-10). He then drew a line crossing out the "Brokerage Fee" provision and initialed it. He then told Mr. Barlage he wanted to do a credit check; one or two days later, he called Mr. Barlage and told him he was going to accept the contract. It was at that time, on or about October 9, 1983, that Mr. Moore executed the contract as seller. For reasons not material, the contract of sale was never carried out by the parties. Mr. Barlage unilaterally cancelled the contract. When Mr. Moore called him to inquire about the $500 earnest money deposit, which the contract had indicated was held by "Stewart Title," Mr. Moore learned that a deposit had not been received by Stewart Title; in fact, Mr. Barlage had made no deposit at all. There is conflicting testimony as to whether respondent ever communicated with Mr. Moore concerning this real estate transaction. Respondent denies any direct involvement. Her denial is rejected and the testimony of Mr. Moore, who had no discernible bias or motive to falsify, is accepted as persuasive.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing, it is RECOMMENDED: That respondent's license as a Florida real estate salesman be revoked for violating Section 475.25(1)(a) and (b) and 475.42(1)(b), Florida Statutes, in the manner described above. DONE and ORDERED this 25th day of February, 1985, in Tallahassee, Florida. R. L. CALEEN, JR. Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 25th day of February, 1985. COPIES FURNISHED: Fred Langford, Esquire Division of Real Estate 400 West Robinson Street Orlando, Florida 32802 Richard McClain, Esquire 6167 Haddon Road West Palm Beach, Florida 33409

Florida Laws (3) 120.57475.25475.42
# 1
BONITA F. SEIDE vs. FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION, 82-002163 (1982)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 82-002163 Latest Update: Mar. 18, 1983

Findings Of Fact On May 3, 1982, Petitioner applied to Respondent for licensure as a real estate salesman. Question No. 6 on the application filed by Petitioner read as follows: Have you ever been arrested for, or charged with the commission of an offense against the laws of any municipality, state or nation, including traffic offenses (but not parking, speeding, inspection or traffic signal violations), without regard to whether convicted, sentenced, pardoned or paroled? If yes, state details including the outcome in full. In response to this question, Petitioner answered as follows: Yes--Please see attached letter. [sic] class C felony. I was put on probation for 2 yrs and paid restitution[sic] this occurred in May of 1978. The letter attached to Petitioner's application read, in part, as follows: On May 24, 1978, I was convicted of burglary, a class C Felony, in Circuit Court, Oneida County, Wisconsin. My sentence was withheld and I was placed on probation for two years. The court ordered that I also pay $9 court cost and restitution to the victim. The record in this cause establishes that on February 13, 1978, Petitioner was arrested in Oneida County, Wisconsin, and charged with feloniously entering a building with intent to steal, a felony punishable under Wisconsin law by imprisonment for up to ten years. On May 24, 1978, Petitioner pleaded guilty to the charge of burglary stemming from her arrest. Petitioner was found guilty of burglary, but adjudication was withheld, and she was placed on probation for two years and ordered to make restitution to the victim of her crime. Subsequently, Petitioner made restitution in the amount of $137.45. In addition, she successfully completed her two-year period of probation, and was terminated from probationary status on May 24, 1980, and her civil rights were restored. Subsequent to her arrest and conviction, both during her probationary period and thereafter, Petitioner has diligently pursued employment in a variety of fields in both Wisconsin and in Florida. While on probation in Wisconsin, Petitioner was employed in a mental health center where her duties included working as a receptionist-secretary, receiving clients, receiving telephone calls, setting up appointments for clients, taking care of bill payments, receiving money on behalf of the center, and maintaining confidentiality of client files. Her employers at the mental health center were aware of her arrest and conviction, and closely evaluated Petitioner prior to hiring her, including administering the Minnesota Multiphasic Personality Inventory to determine whether she should be employed. She not only was employed after this analysis, but performed in a highly commendable fashion during the one-year period in which she held this position. Subsequently, Petitioner has worked as a waitress in various restaurants in Wisconsin, and has served as co-manager of a mobile home park in Florida. In the latter position, it was her responsibility for the general upkeep of the park, and to collect rentals and forward them to the park owner. At the time of final hearing, Petitioner was working as a salaried employee of a time-sharing resort development. In this position, she acts as a tour guide and salesperson, and receives deposits from purchasers and remits them to her employer. Petitioner's testimony and demeanor during the course of the final hearing was that of a mature and responsible wife and mother who feels genuine shame and contrition for the mistake which led to her criminal conviction. Her personal history since the date of the offense demonstrates that she has assumed responsibility for her behavior, and has determined to function effectively as a productive member of society. Accordingly, the record in this cause clearly establishes that because of the lapse of time since her conviction and her subsequent good conduct, that the interests of the public and investors would not likely be endangered by allowing her to become registered as a real estate salesperson.

Florida Laws (3) 120.57475.17475.25
# 3
DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs. BERNARD C. MOSKOWITZ, 76-001710 (1976)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 76-001710 Latest Update: Mar. 10, 1977

The Issue Whether the registration of Respondent Bernard C. Moskowitz should be suspended or revoked for having been guilty of state and federal crimes involving moral turpitude and fraudulent and dishonest dealing more particularly stated in the Administrative Complaint filed by the Florida Real Estate Commission on August 27, 1976. At the commencement of the hearing, Respondent was advised by the Hearing Officer as to his rights as a Respondent to present evidence, cross-examine witnesses and testify in his own behalf if he so desired. He was also advised as to his right to have counsel represent him at his own expense. He acknowledged his understanding of rights and elected to proceed in his own behalf.

Findings Of Fact Respondent is a registered real estate salesman, Certificate No. 36745, and was so registered at all times alleged in the Complaint. (Petitioner's Exhibit 1). On December 17, 1974, Respondent, in case styled United States of America v. Bernard Moskowitz, Docket No. 74-570-CR-PF, United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida, was found guilty on two counts of knowingly and intentionally distributing a controlled substance, to wit: dilaudid, a schedule II narcotic controlled substance, in violation of Title 21, United States Code, Section 841(a)(1). The two offenses were committed on or about October 13 and October 18, 1972, in Dade County, Florida. On February 28, 1975, Respondent was sentenced and thereafter was confined in the Federal Prison at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida, from November 14, 1975 to March 26, 1976. (Petitioner's Composite Exhibit 2). On July 11, 1975, after entering a plea of nolo contendere, Respondent was adjudged guilty of the criminal offense of extortion in Case No. 73-8508, State of Florida vs. Bernard Carl Moskowitz, in the Circuit Court of the Eleventh Judicial Circuit, Dade County, Florida, and was sentenced to be imprisoned by confinement at hard labor in the Dade County Jail for a term of twelve (12) months, to run concurrently with the sentence imposed by the United States District Court, Southern District of Florida in Case No. 74-570-CR-PF, provided that after having served six months of that sentence, the remaining six months to be stayed and withheld and Respondent to be placed on probation and released into the custody of the Florida Probation and Parole Commission for a period of two years. (Petitioner's Exhibit 3). Respondent testified as a witness at the hearing and presented various documents bearing upon the merits of his criminal trials. Respondent is currently on both federal and state probation. (Testimony of Respondent, Respondent's Exhibit 1 through 8).

Recommendation That the registration of Respondent Bernard C. Moskowitz as a real estate salesman be suspended for a period of one year under the authority of Section 475.25(1)(e), Florida Statutes. DONE and ENTERED this 31st day of December, 1976, in Tallahassee, Florida. THOMAS C. OLDHAM Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings Room 530, Carlton Building Tallahassee, Florida 32304 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 31st day of December, 1976.

USC (1) 21 U. S. C. 841 Florida Laws (1) 475.25
# 4
PHILLIP S. WONG vs. FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION, 88-006013 (1988)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 88-006013 Latest Update: Apr. 10, 1989

Findings Of Fact Based on the evidence presented at hearing, the Hearing Officer makes the following findings of fact: Phillip S. Wong is a convicted felon. On December 6, 1982, after entering a plea of guilty, he was adjudicated guilty of one count of each of the following crimes: aggravated assault with a deadly weapon without intent to kill, in violation of Section 784.021(1)(a), Florida Statutes; false imprisonment, in violation of Section 787.02, Florida Statutes; burglary of a dwelling during which an assault was made, in violation of Section 810.02, Florida Statutes; conspiracy to commit a felony, to wit: trafficking in cocaine, in violation of Sections 777.04 and 893.135, Florida Statutes; trafficking in cocaine, in violation of Section 893.135, Florida Statutes; and possession of cocaine with the intent to sell, in violation of Section 893.13, Florida Statues. For these offenses, all of which were committed in August of 1982, Wong received five 1/ separate three-year sentences of imprisonment that ran concurrently with one another. As a prisoner, Wong's conduct was exemplary. Accordingly, in May, 1984, he was placed in a work release program. He completed serving his sentence in September, 1985. Since his return to the community, Wong has married and become a father. To help support his family, he works as a chef in a French restaurant, a position he has held for the past four and a half years. Wong is now a dedicated family man concerned about the welfare of his wife and their two and a half year old child. This concern has prompted him to seek a career in real estate so that he will be better able to provide for his family.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that Respondent enter a Final Order denying Petitioner's application for licensure to practice as a real estate salesman, without prejudice to Petitioner filing a subsequent application when he is able to show that his rehabilitation is sufficiently complete to entitle him to such licensure. See Karl v. Florida Real Estate Commission, 229 So.2d 610, 611 (Fla. 3d DCA 1969)(Commission may not preclude an applicant whose application has been denied because of a prior felony conviction from reapplying for licensure and showing subsequent rehabilitation). DONE and ENTERED this 10th day of April 1989, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. STUART M. LERNER Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The DeSoto Building 1230 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 10th day of April, 1989.

Florida Laws (9) 475.17475.181475.25777.04784.021787.02810.02893.13893.135
# 5
WILLIAM F. DEMLER vs. FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION, 87-002543 (1987)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 87-002543 Latest Update: Jan. 28, 1988

The Issue The issue presented for decision herein is whether or not Petitioner's application for licensure as a Real Estate Salesman should be approved.

Findings Of Fact Based on my observation of the Petitioner and his demeanor while testifying, documentary evidence received and the entire record compiled herein, I make the following relevant factual findings. On approximately February 12, 1987, Petitioner filed an application to take the Florida real estate salesman's examination. In answering Question #6 of the application, regarding applicant's criminal record, Petitioner answered in the affirmative. Petitioner set forth the details, stating: "On May 14, 1985, plead (sic) nolo contendere to the offense of sexual battery. Through plea bargaining was sentenced to 10 years probation, which I am currently in good standing. Case was instituted by my sons (sic) girlfriend, who was living in my home. I had no witnesses in my behalf, made plea through the Public defenders (sic) office (I was not guilty)." (Respondent's Composite Exhibit 1) During the hearing, Petitioner admitted that he affirmatively responded to Question #6 on the license application and, in explanation, states that he was unable to retain an attorney when charged and he, upon advice of a public defender, entered the nolo contendere plea as a "plea of convenience". Petitioner did not present any witnesses at the hearing other than his testimony on his behalf. Petitioner denied that he was guilty of the crime that he was charged and related that his son and his girlfriend lived with him from approximately 1969 through 1980. Sometime during 1980, the son became a "problem child" and was unmanageable. For that reason, the son was placed in the care and custody of the Department of Health and Rehabilitative Services (HRS). Petitioner again took custody of the son when he reached his seventeenth birthday so that the son and his girlfriend could live with him during commencing September 30, 1983. Approximately one year later, during April, 1984, he was charged with the crime of sexual battery. In mitigation, Petitioner avers that he is in good standing with his probation officer and that he was formerly a police officer with the Miami Police Department. Petitioner offered no corroborating witnesses or other independent evidence to refute the charges or to otherwise offer testimony as to rehabilitation of his character.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED: Petitioner's application to take the Real Estate License Examination be DENIED. RECOMMENDED this 28th day of January, 1988, in Tallahassee, Florida. JAMES E. BRADWELL Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 28th day of January, 1988. COPIES FURNISHED: Manuel E. Oliver, Esquire Department of Professional Regulation Assistant Attorney General Suite 212, 400 West Robinson Street Orlando, Florida 32801 William F. Demler 11532 Terra Bella Boulevard Plantation, Florida 33325 Harold Huff, Executive Director Department of Professional Regulation Florida Real Estate Commission 400 West Robinson Street Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32801 Tom Gallagher, Secretary Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0760 William ONeil Department of Professional Regulation General Counsel 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0860

Florida Laws (2) 120.57475.17
# 6
DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs. LOUIS A. BIASI, 84-001053 (1984)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 84-001053 Latest Update: Nov. 07, 1984

The Issue The issue in this matter is whether the Respondent's real estate license should be disciplined.

Findings Of Fact A number of matters brought to issue by the Administrative Complaint were stipulated by the parties on the record at the beginning of the hearing. Respondent stipulated as fact Paragraph 2 of the Administrative Complaint, that is, that Respondent is now and was at all times alleged in the complaint a licensed real estate salesman having been issued license number 0314057. Petitioner's Exhibit 2 to this effect was also admitted into evidence. Respondent stipulated as fact Paragraph 3 of the Administrative Complaint that is, that the last license issued was as a non-active salesman with the residence address of 859 East Jeffrey Street, Boca Raton, Florida 33431. Respondent stipulated as fact Paragraph 4 of the Administrative Complaint, that is, that on or about January 31, 1983, Respondent was found guilty in federal court on the charges of conspiracy to and attempting to import into the United States a quantity of marijuana, resulting in Respondent being sentenced to a seven year term of imprisonment in a federal prison. Respondent subsequently admitted the authenticity of a certified copy of the Judgment and Probation/Commitment Order. As attached to the Administrative Complaint and admitted as Petitioner's Exhibit 1. (See Finding of Fact No. 2, below). Respondent stipulated as fact Paragraph 7 of the Administrative Complaint, that is, that in connection with his conviction, Respondent has been incarcerated in the federal prison located at Eglin Air Force Base, Florida. Petitioner's Exhibit No. 1 was admitted upon stipulation of the parties and without objection. It constitutes the Judgment and Probation/Commitment Order and establishes that Respondent was convicted in a single proceeding arising out of a single indictment of four separate felony counts: Count one, arose out of a conspiracy to import into the United States a quantity of marijuana in violation of Title 21 USC 963. The second count, arose out of a conspiracy to possess a quantity of marijuana, in violation of Title 21 USC 846. Count three concerned the attempt to import into the United States a quantity of marijuana, in violation of Title 21 USC 963 and Title 18 USC 2. Count four arose out of attempting to possess a quantity of marijuana, in violation of Title 21 USC 846 and Title 18 USC 2. Respondent admitted and stipulated that he was convicted of all four felony counts in a single proceeding. Respondent testified that all four of his criminal convictions arose out of a single incident in which he was the victim of a federal government "sting" operation and that he felt his involvement therein does not reflect in any way on his honesty or morality in handling real estate transactions or the money generated by such real estate transactions. Further, Respondent places some emphasis on explaining his part as a co-conspirator is different than a situation in which he might physically touch or have possession of marijuana. He "questioned" that his are crimes of moral turpitude as contemplated by Section 475.25(1)(f), Florida Statutes.

Recommendation Based on the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is recommended that the license of Respondent be suspended for 10 years, which is the maximum suspension provided by Section 475.25(1), Florida Statutes. However, after final and total release by federal authorities, and upon reapplication by Respondent, if pending lapse of time and subsequent good conduct and reputation or for other good reason deemed sufficient, it shall appear to the Florida Real Estate Commission that Respondent shall be so rehabilitated that the interest of the public and investors will not be endangered by Respondent, the suspension should be terminated early. DONE and ORDERED this 2d day of October, 1984, in Tallahassee, Florida. ELLA JANE P. DAVIS Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 2d day of October, 1984. COPIES FURNISHED: John Huskins, Esquire Department of Professional Regulation P. O. Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32802 Louis A. Biasi P. O. Box 600 Eglin, A.F.B., Florida 32542

USC (3) 18 USC 221 USC 84621 USC 963 Florida Laws (2) 120.57475.25
# 7
WALTER L. JORDAN vs. FLORIDA REAL ESTATE COMMISSION, 87-003867 (1987)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 87-003867 Latest Update: Dec. 08, 1987

The Issue The issue is whether the Petitioner, Walter L. Jordan, (Jordan) is entitled to licensure as a real estate salesman in the State of Florida. Petitioner presented his own testimony. Respondent, Department of Professional Regulation, Florida Real Estate Commission, (Commission) had two exhibits admitted in evidence. The transcript of the proceedings was filed on November 18, 1987. At hearing the parties agreed to file proposed orders within ten days of the filing of the transcript The Commission's proposed order was filed on December 2, 1987, and is therefore untimely. Jordan has failed to file a proposed order. Accordingly, while the Commission has filed a proposed order, it has not been considered and no rulings will be made on the Commission's proposed findings of fact.

Findings Of Fact Jordan filed an application for a real estate salesman's license on or about February 14, 1987. In that application, Jordan acknowledged an arrest and conviction for possession of marijuana on February 12, 1976; an arrest and conviction for possession of a firearm in October, 1983; an arrest for aggravated assault in October, 1983, which was allegedly withdrawn by the prosecuting authority; and an arrest and conviction for breach of peace and disorderly intoxication in April, 1984. Based upon these convictions, the Commission denied Jordan's application by letter dated August 27, 1987. Jordan acknowledges these arrests and convictions, but does not believe he should be disqualified from licensure based on "two misdemeanors and one adjudication withheld." Further Jordan testified that it [the convictions] "doesn't prove I'm the best character in the world, but that's no real mar on my character, I wouldn't assume." Jordan presented no evidence of rehabilitation except that he worked for a company named Hubbard from June, 1986, to December, 1986; he was self- employed or unemployed from December, 1986, to April, 1987; he has worked for his father doing construction work since April, 1987; and he is the father of four children that he is taking care of alone.

Recommendation Based upon the foregoing Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law, it is RECOMMENDED that the Florida Real Estate Commission enter a Final Order denying Walter L. Jordan's application for licensure as a real estate salesman. DONE AND ENTERED this 8th day of December, 1987, in Tallahassee, Leon County, Florida. DIANE K. KIESLING Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32399-1550 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 8th day of December, 1987. COPIES FURNISHED: Mr. Walter L. Jordan 3225 Rosselle Street Jacksonville, Florida 32205 Lawrence S. Gendzier Department of Professional Regulation Fla. Real Estate Comm. 400 West Robinson, Room 212 Orlando, Florida 32801 Tom Gallagher, Secretary Department of Professional Regulation 130 North Monroe Street Tallahassee, Florida 32399-0750 Harold Huff, Executive Director Department of Professional Regulation Division of Real Estate Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32801

Florida Laws (3) 120.57475.17475.25
# 9
DIVISION OF REAL ESTATE vs. CAROLYN STEED, 81-002527 (1981)
Division of Administrative Hearings, Florida Number: 81-002527 Latest Update: Nov. 01, 1982

Findings Of Fact Upon consideration of the oral and documentary evidence adduced at the hearing, the following relevant facts are found: At the hearing, counsel for the petitioner attempted to introduce into evidence as an exhibit a computer printout showing respondent's license status. This document could not be identified by any witness called to testify in the proceeding and was not otherwise properly authenticated. The following colloquy between counsel for the petitioner, the Hearing Officer and the respondent occurred prior to the time respondent was placed under oath during the hearing: MR. JORDAN: Finally, Your Honor, we'd like to introduce as our next exhibit a computer printout showing Mrs. Steed's license status which reflects that her broker's license was effective 4/1/81. That would be Exhibit 23. MRS. STEED: Where are they located at? MR. JORDAN: That came out of Tallahassee, I believe. That's just a printout on your license. MRS. STEED: Do they show I'm inactive? MR. JORDAN: Let me see. This simply shows that as of 8/28/81 and you were licensed and your broker's license became effective 4/1/81 and your home address is 10164 Southwest 64th Street. MRS. STEED: None of that is true. THE HEARING OFFICER: She obviously cannot identify that document if it's something that came out of Tallahassee and she's never seen it before. MRS. STEED: It's inactive. THE HEARING OFFICER: Okay. Since Mrs. Steed is not represented by an attorney, I feel obliged to tell her it's the Board's responsibility to prove that she either was licensed at the time of the allegations in the complaint or something -- MRS. STEED: I am not a licensed real estate broker at the present time and I haven't been, but I just don't know the date that it changed. MR. JORDAN: The material time I think is back in `80 and `81 when this was going on. I can call your associate. MRS. STEED: I possibly was licensed then. I'm not saying I wasn't. I don't really know. I would say I was. THE HEARING OFFICER: As I said, it's the Board's responsibility to prove that up. MR. JORDAN: I think she's saying you still have it. It's just that it's inactive. MRS. STEED: I'm inactive. MR. JORDAN: You haven't given up your license; correct? MRS. STEED: No THE HEARING OFFICER: You're not offering that? MR. JORDAN: I'm not offering that. I think she agrees that she was licensed back in '80 and '81 when these transactions were going on. (TR. pp 59 and 60) No other evidence was offered during the hearing as to respondent's status as a licensed real estate broker in Florida.

Recommendation Based upon the findings of fact and conclusions of law recited above, it is RECOMMENDED that the Administrative Complaint against the respondent filed on September 2, 1981, as amended on December 1, 1981, be DISMISSED. Respectfully submitted and entered this 28th day of July, 1982, in Tallahassee, Florida. DIANE D. TREMOR Hearing Officer Division of Administrative Hearings The Oakland Building 2009 Apalachee Parkway Tallahassee, Florida 32301 (904) 488-9675 Filed with the Clerk of the Division of Administrative Hearings this 28 day of July, 1982. COPIES FURNISHED: Robert F. Jordan, Esquire Mr. C. B. Stafford Conrad, Scherer & James Executive Director Post Office Box 14723 Florida Real Estate Commission Ft. Lauderdale, Florida 33302 Post Office Box 1900 Orlando, Florida 32801 Carolyn Steed 5951 S. W. 67th Ave. Fred Wilsen, Esquire Davie, Florida 33314 Florida Real Estate Commission 400 W. Robinson Orlando, Florida 32801

Florida Laws (2) 475.183475.25
# 10

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer