McDowell v. Florida Real Estate Commission

District Court of Appeal of Florida

McDowell v. Florida Real Estate Commission

182 So. 2d 624, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 5930

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedFebruary 2, 1966

DocketNo. 457

StatusPublished

This text of 182 So. 2d 624 (McDowell v. Florida Real Estate Commission) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

McDowell v. Florida Real Estate Commission, 182 So. 2d 624, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 5930 (Fla. Ct. App. 1966).

Pincite

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner, a registered real estate broker, asks certiorari review of a final order entered by the Florida Real Estate Commission wherein he was found guilty on two counts of violating F.S.A. § 475.25(1) (i), and his registration was suspended for a period of six months. He charges that the penalty was excessive under the circumstances. The record reflects that surely the broker was guilty of the violations which were not gross, and we agree that there were certain mitigating features in the transaction, as least according to the broker’s testimony. However, we note that the commission’s determination was well within statutory limits as it could have prescribed suspension for a total of four years under F.S.A. § 475.25(1). We assume, therefore, that the extenuating circumstances argued by petitioner were taken into account and given such weight as they [625]*625deserved, resulting in an order appropriate on the record. Our examination leaves us not able to say that the commission abused its discretion or that its judgment was not in accord with the essential requirements of law. Florida Real Estate Commission v. Rogers, Fla.1965, 176 So.2d 65; see also De Groot v. Sheffield, Fla.1957, 95 So.2d 912.

The Petition for writ of certiorari is denied.

SMITH, C. J., and ANDREWS and WALDEN, JJ., concur.

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

PER CURIAM.

Petitioner, a registered real estate broker, asks certiorari review of a final order entered by the Florida Real Estate Commission wherein he was found guilty on two counts of violating F.S.A. § 475.25(1) (i), and his registration was suspended for a period of six months. He charges that the penalty was excessive under the circumstances. The record reflects that surely the broker was guilty of the violations which were not gross, and we agree that there were certain mitigating features in the transaction, as least according to the broker’s testimony. However, we note that the commission’s determination was well within statutory limits as it could have prescribed suspension for a total of four years under F.S.A. § 475.25(1). We assume, therefore, that the extenuating circumstances argued by petitioner were taken into account and given such weight as they [625]*625deserved, resulting in an order appropriate on the record. Our examination leaves us not able to say that the commission abused its discretion or that its judgment was not in accord with the essential requirements of law. Florida Real Estate Commission v. Rogers, Fla.1965, 176 So.2d 65; see also De Groot v. Sheffield, Fla.1957, 95 So.2d 912.

The Petition for writ of certiorari is denied.

SMITH, C. J., and ANDREWS and WALDEN, JJ., concur.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

182 So. 2d 624, 1966 Fla. App. LEXIS 5930, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/mcdowell-v-florida-real-estate-commission-fladistctapp-1966.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack