From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pauline v. Borer

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Nov 15, 1971
253 So. 2d 719 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1971)

Opinion

No. 71-101.

June 18, 1971. Rehearing Denied November 15, 1971.

Benjamin T. Shuman, of Waterhouse Shuman, Orlando, for petitioner.

Frank A. Wilkinson, Gen. Counsel, Florida Real Estate Commission, Winter Park, for respondents.


Pauline, as listing broker, was advised by a saleslady for another broker in a multiple listing system that their customer was willing to pay $32,000, or, if necessary, $33,000, for the property of Mr. and Mrs. Staples. Pauline's saleslady had procured an offer of $30,000 and talked with Staples on the telephone. Pauline picked up the phone and talked with Staples but did not advise him of the higher offer although he knew of it. Staples sent a telegraphed acceptance of the $30,000 offer. These findings are supported by competent substantial evidence and support the suspension of Pauline's license for one year. Pauline had a duty to disclose the higher offer. See Singer v. M. Grant Inc., Fla.App. 1963, 151 So.2d 52; Anno., 7 A.L.R.3d 693.

Certiorari denied.

PIERCE, C.J., and McNULTY, J., concur.


Summaries of

Pauline v. Borer

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Nov 15, 1971
253 So. 2d 719 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1971)
Case details for

Pauline v. Borer

Case Details

Full title:RICHARD C. PAULINE, PETITIONER, v. CHARLES F. BORER AND THE FLORIDA REAL…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District

Date published: Nov 15, 1971

Citations

253 So. 2d 719 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1971)

Citing Cases

Pauline v. Borer

McCAIN, Justice. By conflict certiorari proceedings, we have for review a decision of the Second District…