Kout v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Real Estate

405 So. 2d 435, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 21327
District Court of Appeal of Florida·Decided October 6, 1981·No. No. 80-1927·Published·Cited by 2 cases

Opinion

SCHWARTZ, Judge.

The hearing officer found that the appellant-licensees had not committed the offenses of which they were accused and concluded that the charges against them should be dismissed. On review, the Board of Real Estate nevertheless entered an order suspending their licenses for 90 days on the asserted ground that the facts found by the officer established violations of Section 475.25(l)(b), Florida Statutes (1979). Our analysis of the findings reveals that this determination was completely incorrect. See Waltman v. Florida Real Estate Commission, 254 So.2d 32 (Fla. 3d DCA 1971); Rivard v. McCoy, 212 So.2d 672 (Fla. 1st DCA 1968), cert. denied, 219 So.2d 703 (Fla. 1968); see generally, Pauline v. Borer, 274 So.2d 1, 3 (Fla.1973). The order below is therefore completely unsupported by the conclusions reached by the trier of fact and accordingly must be reversed. Section 120.-57(l)(b)(9), Florida Statutes (1979); Chakford v. Strum, 87 So.2d 419 (Fla.1956); Gruman v. State, Department of Revenue, 379 So.2d 1313 (Fla. 2d DCA 1980). The cause is remanded with directions to dismiss the proceedings.

Reversed.1

Footnotes

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Kout v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Real Estate, 405 So. 2d 435, 1981 Fla. App. LEXIS 21327 (Fla. Ct. App. 1981).

405 So. 2d 435 (Kout v. Department of Professional Regulation, Board of Real Estate) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Morris v. DEPT. OF PROF. REGULATION
474 So. 2d 841 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1985)
Bekiempis v. DEPARTMENT OF PROFESSIONAL REG.
421 So. 2d 693 (District Court of Appeal of Florida, 1982)