Florida/Georgia Personal Injury & Workers Compensation

...broker regarding his commissions on transactions in which Ryan was involved. Bryan also contends that the payments to Ryan were against public policy because they amounted to splitting fees with a person not licensed to sell real estate, contrary to Section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1975)....

...duly licensed brokers in other states provided the services in the State of Florida are performed by the principal broker who is licensed here. On the other hand, appellees maintain that § 475.01, Fla. Stat., F.S.A., [1] taken into conjunction with § 475.41, Fla....

...red as a real estate broker are only those which take place in this state. If this be the case, it would not be a violation under § 475.25(1) (f), as it existed prior to 1961, to pay a commission for securing a purchaser out of the state, nor would § 475.41 invalidate a contract for commission for such an act....

...or officers or directors of corporations engaged in performing any of the aforesaid acts or services; each and every such person shall be deemed and held to be a `real estate broker' or a `real estate salesman,' as hereinafter classified * * *." [2] § 475.41 provides: "475.41 Contracts of unregistered person for commissions invalid....

...real estate commission because there was no genuine issue of material fact concerning the proposition that plaintiff-appellant Bradley was not registered as a real estate broker or salesman "at the time the act or service was performed." Fla. Stat. § 475.41, F.S.A....

...Mannino, 253 F.2d 627 (5th Cir.1958). The contract being void as a matter of public policy, the services rendered in connection therewith cannot be made the basis for a quantum meruit claim as appellants suggest in their fourth count. Affirmed. NOTES [1] The entire text of Fla. Stat. § 475.41, F.S.A., is as follows: "475.41 Contracts of unregistered person for commissions invalid....

...ot a procuring cause of the Starr Bros./Bellm-Terrace Village sale, nor was he a cooperating broker with Tassy as to this sale; that Tassy (Holiday Realty, Ltd.), not being a registered Florida broker, was not entitled to a broker's commission under section 475.41, Florida Statutes; and to further adjudicate that since no one was entitled to the brokerage commission the court should declare that the plaintiffs, as sellers, were entitled to the sum of the commission held by the closing attorney in escrow....

...s to be paid and that if it was not to be paid, then the escrowed sum should be returned to the buyer. Steelman and Tassy answered separately, denying various allegations. The trial court ultimately entered a summary final judgment finding: (1) that section 475.41 Florida Statutes, was constitutional and applied to prevent Tassy and Holiday Realty, Ltd., from recovering a commission, (2) that Steelman was not a procuring cause of the sale in question, (3) that Starr was a registered Florida broker and agent of the sellers and negotiated the sale and agreed to pay Tassy a commission when he knew, or should have known, that section 475.41, Florida Statutes, would prevent Tassy from recovering a commission and that, accordingly, Starr Bros./Bellm had "unclean hands," and therefore, (4) by applying "equitable principles," the escrowed funds should be divided equally between the sellers, Starr Bros./Bellm, and the purchaser, Terrace Village....

...s' memorandum of law, neither could she [sic] still share in a brokerage fee. Tassy and Holiday Realty, Ltd., appeal the denial of the commission held in escrow. Starr Bros./Bellm cross-appeal the "equitable division" of the escrow fund. We reverse. Section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1981), is part of the Florida Real Estate Licensing Act and provides: No contract for a commission or compensation for any act or service enumerated in s....

...ance and renewal of the license at the time the act or service was performed. *34 The avowed purpose behind this section (and the act in general) is to protect the public from dishonest or unscrupulous real estate operators. [1] As such, it is clear section 475.41 bars a foreign broker (i.e., a broker licensed in a foreign jurisdiction but not in Florida) from collecting a commission for brokerage services when the services are performed in Florida and no licensed Florida broker is involved. [2] However, section 475.41 does not bar a foreign broker from collecting a commission for brokerage services when the services are not performed in Florida and the foreign broker was cooperating with a Florida broker....

...[3] However, the facts of this case do not fall completely within either of the above situations. Here, a foreign broker is suing for his brokerage commission where part of the services were performed in Florida but the foreign broker was cooperating with a Florida broker. We hold section 475.41 does not act to bar the foreign broker's suit in this situation, provided that the foreign broker is acting as a co-broker with a Florida broker and part of the foreign broker's services are in good faith actually performed in the jurisdiction where he or she is licensed. Under these circumstances the public policy of section 475.41, Florida Statutes, is effectuated because under any co-broker arrangement the Florida licensed broker will be legally and professionally responsible for the acts of the cooperating foreign broker as well as for his own acts in the joint venture....

...The statutory authority of the Department of Professional Regulation and the Florida Real Estate Commission to supervise and police the Florida broker will be sufficient to protect the public in Florida from untrained, unsupervised, dishonest or unscrupulous real estate operators as is the purpose of section 475.41 and the other provisions of chapter 475, Florida Statutes....

...ervices, is in the public interest and should not bar enforcement of the brokerage agreement. Although not in direct conflict, we believe our holding to be irreconcilable with Harris v. McKay, 176 So.2d 572 (Fla. 3d DCA 1965), which holds that under section 475.41, Florida Statutes, when a licensed Florida broker even cooperates with a foreign broker not licensed in Florida, the licensed Florida broker is tainted and cannot recover a commission....

...ooperating foreign broker. Accordingly, if in performing services as a broker in this case, Tassy in fact was acting in good faith as a cooperating broker with either Florida licensed broker Steelman or Starr, that fact satisfies the requirements of section 475.41, Florida Statutes, as we construe that statute, and Tassy would not be barred from recovering a brokerage commission in this case....

...dence need be presented. We must determine therefore whether or not a complaint for an indebtedness based upon an earned brokerage commission is fatally defective if it fails to allege that the plaintiff is a licensed real estate broker or salesman. Section 475.41 Fla....

...assessed against the sale of the property. Among other things, the appellant argues that since the amount awarded to appellees, unregistered real estate brokers, was a commission, the agreement is unenforceable because of the prohibitory language in Section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1977), interdicting the payment of a real estate commission to one not so registered....

...ered into although he must have one at the time he renders the services for which he is entitled to compensation. The basis of the District Court's opinion was that respondents were only required to be registered at the time services were performed, Section 475.41, Florida Statutes, that the parties executed the contracts in a jurisdiction which did not require the registration of real estate brokers, that the contracts were to commence in futuro, that the sales contract provided that the respon...

...r the brokeraging of property situated in the place where the contract was executed? I would respond in the negative to the first question and in the affirmative to the second question. The pertinent Florida statutory provisions provide, as follows: Section 475.41....

...service was performed" plaintiff was not registered as a real estate broker or salesman. Also see Campbell v. Romph Bros., Inc., 132 So.2d 466 (Fla.App. 1961); Harris v. McKay, supra; Wegmann v. Mannino, 253 F.2d 627 (5th Cir.1958). As aforestated, Section 475.41 specifically provides that contracts of unregistered person for commission or compensation to perform any act or service enumerated in Subsection (2) of Section 475.01 is invalid....

...("Shochet") arranged for defendant First Union Corporation to purchase a discount brokerage company, Dis-Com Securities, Inc. First Union did purchase Dis-Com. Plaintiff is now suing to recover a broker's or finder's fee. The defendant has moved for summary judgment in order to clarify the application of Fla.Stat. §§ 475.41 and 475.01(3) to this transaction. Florida Statutes, § 475.41 prohibits the payment of any "commission or compensation" for the acts of a "broker" unless that person seeking the "commission or compensation" is a licensed real estate broker under Chapter 475....

...d by the provisions of Chapter 517 *1037 of the Florida Statutes. Finally, plaintiff contends that Chapter 475 is unconstitutional under Article 3, Section 6 of the Florida Constitution (1968 revision). SAVINGS CLAUSE Upon the enactment of Fla.Stat. § 475.41, the legislature also enacted § 475.17(3) which provided that all "individuals" who had been engaged in the sale of, inter alia, business enterprises on January 1, 1982 were exempt from the licensing statute for two years....

...However, the instant case involves more than the sale of a portion of Dis-Com's stock. Instead, through its purchase of Dis-Com stock, First Union purchased the entire, ongoing business of Dis-Com. (See plaintiff's Complaint, ¶ 12). The language of Fla.Stat. §§ 475.01(3) and 475.41 is clear....

...contract of employment is entered into, but he must have one at the time he renders the services for which he is entitled to compensation. See 12 C.J.S. Brokers § 67 (1938); 12 Am.Jur.2d Brokers § 179 (1964). Additionally, our own Florida Statute 475.41, F.S.A., clearly states that registration is required at the time of performing the services: "475.41 Contracts of unregistered person for commissions invalid No contract for a commission or compensation for any act or service enumerated in subsection (2) of § 475.01 shall be valid unless the broker or salesman shall have complied with this c...

...e by avoiding a just obligation which he has contracted to pay. Pokress v. Tisch Florida Properties, Inc., Fla.App. 1963, 153 So.2d 346. We hold that the contracts in the case sub judice are not void and unenforceable because registration under F.S. § 475.41, F.S.A....

...ement, Milam Dairy Warehouse's failure to obtain a broker's license prior to the execution of the Warehouse Management Agreement rendered the entire real estate transaction void. We disagree. Even if the Warehouse Management Agreement was void under section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1985), [2] with respect to any claim by Milam Dairy Warehouse for a broker's commission, the absence of a license was no basis for rescission of the entire note and mortgage....

...g the services of Kagan in finding a purchaser, completed the sale and retained the entire commission. The trial court dismissed the cause upon the theory that a broker not licensed in Florida may not sue for a commission. It is true that Fla. Stat. § 475.41 provides as follows: "Contracts of unregistered person for commissions invalid....

...right of brokers and salesmen of free access to the courts. It is apparent *1133 that the classification is not unreasonable because real estate brokers and salesmen are privileged by the statutory law of this state in the collection of commissions. Section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1977), in effect, provides that only a real estate broker who is properly registered "......

...rojects and other business income generated during the term of this Agreement. It is Trustee's position that this provision violates Florida Statutes § 475 et seq., thereby rendering the Letter Agreement unenforceable as a matter of law. Fla. Stat. § 475.41 entitled, Contracts of unlicensed person for commissions invalid, states: No contract for a commission or compensation for any act or service enumerated in § 475.01(3) is valid unless the broker or sales associate has complied with this ch...

...OTDC relies upon Newcomer v. Rizzo, 163 So.2d 312 (Fla.3d DCA 1964) to argue that the Letter Agreement is a valid assignment of Vilsack's interest in proceeds from a real estate commission earned by Vilsack and as such it does not violate Fla. Stat. § 475.41. For purposes of this matter, the Court must determine only whether the Letter Agreement violates Fla. Stat. § 475.41. The Court does not reach the issue of whether the Letter Agreement provides for a "valid" assignment of Vilsack's interest in a real estate commission because it is irrelevant to the issue of whether the Letter Agreement violates Fla. Stat. § 475.41....

...In addition, the Court declines to comment on the "validity" of the assignment because that question impinges on the issue of whether the transfer was constructively fraudulent for less than reasonably equivalent value. For the reasons stated below, the Court finds that the Letter Agreement does not violate Fla. Stat. § 475.41....

...e by Vilsack of brokerage services for TBM. Since TBM and Vilsack were licensed in accordance with Florida law, the payment of a real estate commission pursuant to the BAP Contract and the Independent Contractor Agreement does not violate Fla. Stat. § 475.41....

...services enumerated in section 475.01(3) in return for the contribution of Vilsack's commission and other income. It is therefore immaterial that OTDC is unlicensed because the Letter Agreement is not a contract of the kind prohibited by Fla. Stat. § 475.41....

...See Global Resorts, Inc., v. Famille, Inc., 478 So.2d 1179 (Fla.2d DCA 1985) (affirming lower court's ruling that alleged oral contract for payment to unlicensed plaintiff for soliciting prospective buyers of time share units was unenforceable pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 475.41); Hanks v....

...Hamilton, 339 So.2d 1122 (Fla.4th DCA 1976) (affirming lower court ruling that written contract providing for payment, to an unlicensed person for services rendered, of a portion of commissions received by a broker in connection with the purchase and sale of real property violated Fla. Stat. § 475.41); Bradley v....

...t in this case, the Letter Agreement is not a contract for payment of real estate commissions to OTDC, an unlicensed person, for services enumerated in § 475.01(3). Therefore the Court concludes that the Letter Agreement does not violate Fla. Stat. § 475.41....

...as speculative at best. OTDC argues further that the transfer was intended to be, and was, a contemporaneous exchange for present value pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 726.104(3). While the Court finds that the Letter Agreement does not violate Fla. Stat. § 475.41, the presence of disputed issues of material fact prevent the Court from determining in the context of summary judgment motions, whether the transfer of the right to receive real estate commissions by virtue of the Letter Agreement is a fraudulent transfer for less the reasonably equivalent value....

...CONCLUSION The Court finds that the Letter Agreement is not a contract for the payment of commissions to an unlicensed person for services of the type enumerated in Fla. Stat. § 475.01(3). Therefore the Letter Agreement is not invalid pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 475.41....

...to receive commissions. ORDER The Court, having reviewed the submissions of the parties, the applicable law and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, hereby ORDERS AND ADJUDGES that: 1. The Letter Agreement does not violate Florida Statutes § 475.41. 2. Trustee's Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. 3. OTDC'S Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED IN PART insofar as the Court finds that the Letter Agreement does not violate Florida Statutes § 475.41, all other relief requested in OTDC's Cross-Motion is DENIED. NOTES [1] Florida Statutes § 475.41 references, § 475.01(3) which in turn references the definition of "broker" found in § 475.01(1)(a)....

...her. As to the first paragraph of the contract, Hardcastle is correct in its contention that section 475, Florida Statutes, forecloses Cohen from any recovery for the $100,000 (minus advancements) for services rendered in the acquisition of Tract I. Section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1983), prohibits unlicensed brokers from collecting a commission on any contract. Sections 475.41, 475.01(3) and 475.01(4), Florida Statutes (1983) set forth the definitions of a broker or a salesman and clearly show that Cohen's activities were such that he is precluded from recovering any monies as a matter of law....

...2d DCA 1963) (Services need not be couched in terms of a typical real estate contract to be under section 475, court found telephone soliciting included); see also Schy v. Margulies, 407 So.2d 267 (Fla. 3d DCA 1981) (agreement to pay a finder's fee was included under the statute). Contrary to section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1983), the first paragraph of the contract *1384 was actually for a commission or compensation for brokerage services to be paid to Cohen, who was not a licensed real estate broker....

...e services relied on to support the broker's allegation of performance of the listing contract were those and only those that were performed by an unregistered salesman in the employ of the broker, recovery of the claimed commission was precluded by § 475.41 Fla....

...To hold otherwise would permit a registered broker to use the services of unregistered salesmen to handle sales and leases of real estate, and to recover commissions or compensation therefor, contrary to the letter and spirit of Chapter 475, Fla. Stat., F.S.A. and to the express prohibition of § 475.41 thereof....

...liquor license with relation to which the real estate lease was only incidental and deserving of little or no part of the consideration which was paid or agreed to be paid. In view of certain provisions of Chapter 475, Fla. Stat., F.S.A., including § 475.41, [1] if the transaction was a lease of real estate or essentially a lease of real estate, the broker's commission contract was invalid and unenforceable because the services relied on as the basis for the claim for the commission consisted of those performed by the broker's unregistered salesman....

...For the reasons stated we hold that the commission contract declared on by the broker was invalid and unenforceable, and that the motions of the defendants for a directed verdict should have been granted. The judgment is reversed, and the cause is remanded with direction to enter judgment for the defendants. NOTES [1] Section 475.41 Fla....

...The appellee refused payment, and the appellant filed this action to recover same. Upon trial of the case before a jury, the court, on motion of the defendant-appellee, directed a verdict for the defendant, on the ground that recovery was barred by § 475.41 Fla....

...purchasers, lessors or lessees of real property or interest therein". The services performed by the appellant fell within that language. Appellants contention that the transaction did not involve an interest in real estate is refuted by the record. Section 475.41, Fla....

...provides that no contract for a commission or compensation *868 for any act enumerated in § 475.01(2) shall be valid unless the broker (or salesman) is registered as required by this statute. The appellant's contention that it should be permitted to avoid the effect of § 475.41 on the ground that it had no contract for compensation or commission is without merit....

unenforceable because of Fla.Stat. § 475.41, F.S.A. Fla.Stat. § 475.41, F.S.A. provides that “[n]o contract”

...The issue in this case is whether a corporate business broker which put the buyer and seller together in the sale of an automobile dealership is precluded from recovering a brokerage fee because it did not comply with the licensing requirements of Chapter 475, Florida Statutes (2004). We hold that section 475.41, Florida Statutes (2004), prevents the broker from enforcing its fee contract and reverse the final judgment entered in favor of the broker....

...of real estate brokers, sales persons, and schools, concluding that the statute did not apply to business brokers. Whether Chapter 475 applied in this case was crucial because the statute declares a contract with an unlicensed broker to be invalid. Section 475.41 provides that "[n]o contract for a commission or compensation for any act or service enumerated in *482 s....

...ase Florida real property. The solicitation consisted of sending to the buyer an information sheet, a cover letter, a map showing the location of the property, and a study regarding "prospective uses of the property." Id. at 1318. Previews held that section 475.41 *483 precluded the Georgia broker from enforcing his fee contract because the "foreign broker's activities were directed toward the solicitation of a purchaser in Florida" such that he had "engaged in brokerage activities" in Florida without a license....

...urt order. After a hearing, the chancellor determined the note to be void and awarded judgment to the defendants on their counterclaim for the monies already paid on the note. The plaintiffs and Frasure appeal. We must first determine the meaning of § 475.41, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., which provides: “No contract for a commission or compensation for any act or service enumerated in subsection (2) of § 475.01 shall be valid unless the broker or salesman shall have complied with this chapter in regar...

...al of the certificate at the time the act or service was performed.” It is without question that Frasure was a licensed broker and Rutherford was an unlicensed salesman. It necessarily follows that in order for the contract to be void by virtue of § 475.41 there must have been a contract between appellee and Rutherford. If Frasure were the only contracting party, the agreement would be valid insofar as § 475.41 is concerned....

...er and seller with regard to each other and this agreement did not confer any rights on either Frasure or Rutherford, it did however, waive any claims which Frasure and Rutherford might have as against the seller. The contract rights contemplated by § 475.41 were conferred upon Frasure by virtue of paragraph 1 of the addendum to the option agreement, set out above....

...The present contract for the payment of real estate commission was obviously drawn with the Campbell case in mind, and for the specific purpose of avoiding that pitfall. Although Rutherford could not have enforced any agreement for compensation between Frasure and himself by virtue of § 475.41, appellee acquired no rights by virtue thereof, nor does this proposition invalidate the assignment from Frasure to Rutherford. 2 In view of the fact that the contractual obligation initiating the commission was between a licensed broker and client, it is not void and unenforceable by virtue of § 475.41....

...o decree that the Newcomers could not recover the balance due on the note, and to require them to pay back the sums of money already received. Appellees contend that to allow the enforcement of this contract would be tantamount to judicial repeal of § 475.41....

...jects and other business income generated during the term of this Agreement. It is Trustee’s position that this provision violates Florida Statutes § 475 et seq., thereby rendering the Letter Agreement unenforceable as a matter of law. Fla. Stat. § 475.41 entitled, Contracts of unlicensed person for commissions invalid, states: No contract for a commission or compensation for any act or service enumerated in § 475.01(3) is valid unless the broker or sales associate has complied with this ch...

...OTDC relies upon Newcomer v. Rizzo, 163 So.2d 312 (Fla.3d DCA 1964) to argue that the Letter Agreement is a valid assignment of Vilsack’s interest in proceeds from a real estate commission earned by Vilsack and as such it does not violate Fla. Stat. § 475.41 . For purposes of this matter, the Court must determine only whether the Letter Agreement violates Fla. Stat. § 475.41 . The Court does not reach the issue of whether the Letter Agreement provides for a “valid” assignment of Vilsack’s interest in a real estate commission because it is irrelevant to the issue of whether the Letter Agreement violates Fla. Stat. § 475.41 ....

...In addition, the Court declines to comment on the “validity” of the assignment because that question impinges on the issue of whether the transfer was constructively fraudulent for less than reasonably equivalent value. For the reasons stated below, the Court finds that the Letter Agreement does not violate Fla. Stat. § 475.41 ....

...y Vilsack of brokerage services for TBM. Since TBM and Vilsack were licensed in accordance with Florida law, the payment of a real estate commission pursuant to the BAP Contract and the Independent Con-' tractor Agreement does not violate Fla. Stat. § 475.41 ....

...ervices enumerated in section 475.01(3) in return for the contribution of Vilsack’s commission and other income. It is therefore immaterial that OTDC is unlicensed because the Letter Agreement is not a contract of the kind prohibited by Fla. Stat. § 475.41 ....

...See Global Resorts, Inc., v. Famille, Inc., 478 So.2d 1179 (Fla.2d DCA 1985) (affirming lower court’s ruling that alleged oral contract for payment to unlicensed plaintiff for soliciting prospective buyers of time share units was unenforceable pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 475.41 ); Hanks v....

...Hamilton, 339 So.2d 1122 (Fla.4th DCA 1976) (affirming lower court ruling that written contract providing for payment, to an unlicensed person for services rendered, of a portion of commissions received by a broker in connection with the purchase and sale of real property violated Fla. Stat. § 475.41 ); Bradley v....

...t in this case, the Letter Agreement is not a contract for payment of real estate commissions to OTDC, an unlicensed person, for services enumerated in § 475.01(3). Therefore the Court concludes that the Letter Agreement does not violate Fla. Stat. § 475.41 ....

...s speculative at best. OTDC argues further that the transfer was intended to be, and was, a contemporaneous exchange for present value pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 726.104 (3). While the Court finds that the Letter Agreement does not violate Fla. Stat. § 475.41 , the presence of disputed issues of material fact prevent the Court from determining in the context of summary judgment motions, whether the transfer of the right to receive real estate commissions by virtue of the Letter Agreement is a fraudulent transfer for less the reasonably equivalent value....

...CONCLUSION The Court finds that the Letter Agreement is not a contract for the payment of commissions to an unlicensed person for services of the type enumerated in Fla. Stat. § 475.01 (3). Therefore the Letter Agreement is not invalid pursuant to Fla. Stat. § 475.41 ....

...to receive commissions. ORDER The Court, having reviewed the submissions of the parties, the applicable law and being otherwise fully advised in the premises, hereby ORDERS AND ADJUDGES that: 1. The Letter Agreement does not violate Florida Statutes § 475.41. 2. Trustee’s Motion for Summary Judgment is DENIED. 3. OTDC’S Cross-Motion for Summary Judgment is GRANTED IN PART insofar as the Court finds that the Letter Agreement does not violate Florida Statutes § 475.41, all other relief requested in OTDC’s Cross-Motion is DENIED. . Florida Statutes § 475.41 references § 475.01(3) which in turn references the defi *551 nition of "broker” found in § 475.01(l)(a)....

...nt also alleged the Broker was “a duly licensed real estate broker.” In its answers to interrogatories, however, the Broker revealed it was licensed in New York, not Florida. The Property Owners then moved for summary judgment based on section 475.41, Florida Statutes (2014), which prohibits brokers without Florida real estate licenses from collecting commissions on Florida transactions....

...The Broker filed an affidavit by its vice-president, in which the vice-president essentially testified that the Broker actually co-brokered the extension of the lease with First Market Properties, LLC, a Florida licensed broker.1 The Broker then argued that its claim could proceed under a common law exception to section 475.41 which allows out-of-state brokers to sue for their share of the commission when they co-broker property with a licensed Florida broker. See, e.g., Kagan v....

...broker for the recovery of his share of the commission from the Florida broker who employed him”). The rationale for this exception is that, when the foreign broker is acting as a co-broker with a Florida broker, “the public policy of section 475.41, Florida Statutes, is effectuated because under any co-broker arrangement the Florida licensed broker will be legally and professionally responsible for the acts of the 1 In its initial brief, the Broker indicated that the correct...

DELL, Judge. Trum Corp., plaintiff below, appeals a final judgment finding its commission contracts with appellee partnership invalid pursuant to Section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1977)....

...Testimony shows that Trum ran the corporation, but the record shows no evidence of acts by Trum or McCaffery calculated to procure a purchaser for the Plaza. After a non-jury trial the trial judge found the corporation’s claims under both the listing agreement and the management contract unenforceable pursuant to Section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1977). Appellant simply asks whether the trial court erred in holding that Section 475.41 renders these contracts invalid....

...sons perform some or all of the acts or services contemplated by the contract. The courts of Florida have considered variations of the first question presented by this case, but the facts sub judice require us to attempt to reconcile the language of Section 475.41 with the decisions of our sister courts. In order to better understand the legislative intent of Section 475.41, we have highlighted the operative words: No contract tor a commission or compensation for any act or service enumerated in subsection (2) of s. 475.01 shall be valid unless the broker or salesman shall have complied with this chapter in regard to registration and renewal of the certificate at the time the act or service was performed. (Emphasis added). § 475.41, Fla.Stat....

...(Emphasis added). Id. at 200. Appellees further suggest that Pearce v. Previews, Inc., supra, stands for the proposition that if the listing agreement in Pearce had been executed in Florida by a non-active corporate officer it would have been invalid under Section 475.41....

...The theme of these eases and others cited in the parties’ briefs and the plain language of the statutes seems clear. Chapter 475 prohibits the performance of broker’s acts by unregistered persons, and provides various civil and criminal penalties for violation thereof. Section 475.41 works a forfeiture when an unregistered person performs the services for which the client has contracted....

...ability to recover. The disability which appellants contend precludes Thomas Concepcion from recovering any commission is the fact that he was not a registered broker in Puerto Rico or Florida “at the time the act or service was performed”, F.S. § 475.41, F.S.A....

...In the case sub judice Concepcion is a co-owner of a real estate firm in Puerto Rico and is actively engaged as a real estate broker. Puerto Rico does not require the prerequisite of registration for one to deal in real estate. Consequently, it is not a violation of the Florida Real Estate License Law, F.S. § 475.41, F.S.A....

...tion, that Leedco acted as a “broker” within the meaning of section 475.01(l)(c), Florida Statutes (1983). Global argues that since Leedco had not obtained a real estate broker’s license, the alleged oral contract was unenforceable pursuant to section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1983)....

...m meruit basis to collect a reasonable commission in a lump sum. *562 Allred cites Newcomer v. Rizzo, 163 So.2d 312 (Fla.App.1964), in support of his contention that the agreement is valid. However, Newcomer, supra primarily involved Florida Statute § 475.41 which provides that a contract for a commission is not valid unless the broker or salesman is registered under Florida law....

...We reverse the trial court's final judgment on appellants' counterclaim involving real estate commissions in connection with *885 sales at appellants' development. Appellee Harris was not entitled to real estate commissions, because he acted as a broker and was not licensed. See § 475.41, Fla....

its brokerage license with the result that section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1985), prohibited it from

all the negotiations. In this respect I note Section 475.41 of the Florida Statutes (1975) which states:

ALTENBERND, Judge. Revac appeals a judgment on directed verdict which disallowed its claim for a real estate commission because it was not entitled to enforce its commission contract under section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1981)....

...Revac sued him for commissions in the approximate amount of $165,000. Although Revac had not qualified to do business in Florida during the period when it sold the timeshare units, it did qualify to do business in Florida in order to sue Mr. Woodward. Section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1981), invalidates any contract for a real estate commission for services enumerated in section 475.01(3), unless the broker is licensed in Florida....

...Gulf & Western Industries, Inc., 666 F.2d 800 (3rd Cir.1981). In that case, a New Jersey broker entered into a real estate commission contract with a non-Florida corporation, located in Pennsylvania, but owning land in Florida. That court refused to apply section 475.41, Florida Statutes (Supp.1978), in the absence of any evidence of services performed in the state of Florida....

...While Florida can realistically provide protection for persons damaged by licensed real estate brokers, it is difficult to protect persons from unregulated brokers. See §§ 475.482-.483, Fla.Stat. (1981). Thus, we hold that Revac’s undisputed activities in Florida were sufficient to invoke section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1981), precluding the enforcement of its claim for commission....

...Holcomb, maker, and Honeylance, Inc., payee and endorser. The trial court dismissed the action on a summary judgment for the defendant-appel-lee Holcomb on the grounds that the note was given as payment for a real estate commission to a nonlicensed real estate broker, in violation of F.S.1967, Section 475.41, F.S.A., and was, therefore, illegal and unenforceable....

...Davis, Inc., a licensed real estate broker, earned the commission but had it paid by having Holcomb execute the note payable to Honeylance, Inc. On the other hand, the appellee Holcomb contends that *749 Honeylance, Inc., which is admittedly not a licensed real estate broker, earned the commission and Section 475.41, makes the note illegal and unenforceable....

prohibited by the Florida Real Estate License Law, Section 475.41, Florida Statutes. *629In this case petitioner

...precludes recovery by an unlicensed broker. Other questions may remain for determination against Biggs and Sewell. This appeal raises only the question of contractual liability of defendants Wood, Moore and Davis. Section 475.01(2) includes an appraiser in the definition of broker. Section 475.41 provides that a contract to appraise is invalid unless the broker is registered....

...Also, Panton filed a third party claim against Brad Wood and Merle Wood & Associates seeking return of the commission previously paid on the Roth transaction, alleging that Brad Wood was not a licensed real estate sales associate. Panton contended that Brad Wood’s failure to comply with the licensing requirements of section 475.41, Florida Statutes precluded Brad Wood from receiving any commission on the Roth or Wood transactions. The trial court granted appellees’ motions for summary judgment, holding that Brad Wood’s actions did not violate section 475.41 as a matter of law. The instant litigation turns on the application of section 475.41, Florida Statutes (2002), which reads: No contract for a commission or compensation for any act or service enumerated in § 475.01(3) is valid unless the broker or sales associate has complied with this chapter in regard to issuance and renewal of the license at the time the act or services was performed....

...ised expressly or impliedly, or with an intent to collect or receive a compensation or valuable consideration.” § 475.01(a), Fla. Stat. (2002). Viewing the facts in the light most favorable to Panton, we find issues of material fact when applying section 475.41 to these transactions....

appellee was a registered real estate broker. Section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1977), provides that no

commission agreement here was invalid pursuant to Section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1981), which provides as

however, is not dispositive of this case. Section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1989), which invalidates

...sion. 7. The Defendants raise as a defense in this action that the Notes jvere given as payment of a real estate commission and that Plaintiff was not a registered real estate broker and therefore the Notes are illegal and void under Florida Statute Section 475.41....

...a larger share of the profits of proceeds from the transaction than his proportional investment therein would otherwise justify, such excess share being directly or indirectly the result of the service of buying [or] selling . . said property ...” Section 475.41, Florida Statutes, provides: “No contract for a commission or compensation for any act or service enumerated in subsection (2) of 475.01 shall be valid unless the broker or salesman shall have complied with this chapter in regard to...

...te broker’ or a ‘real estate salesman,’ as hereinafter classified, unless said person when performing the act or acts herein specified shall be acting * * * as an attorney-at-law within the scope of his duties as such, * * [Emphasis supplied.] Section 475.41, Fla.Stat., F.S.A., provides, in substance, that no contract for compensation for any act or service enumerated in § 475.01(2), supra, shall be valid unless the broker or salesman was properly registered under Chapter 475, supra, at the time the act or service was performed....

...oreign broker not licensed in the State of Florida. The trial court agreed with appellees’ position and granted their motion for summary judgment. The following statutory and case authorities are implicated in the proper resolution of this appeal. Section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1985), provides, in part: No contract for a commission or compensation for any act or service enumerated in s....

...Chapter 475 Count V regards the Business Brokerage Agreement between Biltmore and the D'Anza Defendants. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant Biltmore violated Chapter 475 of the Florida Statutes because it was not a Florida licensed broker during the relevant period. Florida Statute § 475.41 states that, "no contract for a commission or compensation for any act or service enumerated in § 475.01(3) is valid unless the broker or sales associate has complied with this chapter in regard to issuance and renewal of the license at th...

...Appellant attempts unsuccessfully to equate the circumstances in this case with those in Newcomer v. Rizzo, 163 So.2d 312 (Fla. 3d DCA 1964). The circumstances in this case differ greatly from those in Newcomer . First, in Newcomer , the defendants attempted to defend on the basis of the provisions of section 475.41, not 475.-42(1)(d), which invalidates commission contracts where the broker or salesman is not properly licensed....

...the broker and the third parties. Subsequently, the third parties brought suit to collect the note. The Newcomer court held that while the salesman could not have enforced any agreement for compensation between the broker and the salesman because of section 475.41, the third parties were not so foreclosed because they acquired no rights by virtue of the commission agreement....

...There is nothing in the Objection of the Debtor which even intimates that the invalidity of the claim is based on the contention that the monies claimed by CRI are commissions earned for sale of real estate by CRI which was never licensed as a real estate broker and, therefore, under applicable law, Fla.Stat. 475.41, is not authorized to receive any commission....

...In addition to the claim for damages resulting from the aforesaid breach, appellants alleged a count in fraud and one in specific performance. Essentially, appellants argue that, although The Moorings Development Company was not a licensed broker as required by section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1983), 1 its wholly owned subsidiary, Moorings Realty Sales, Inc., was a licensed broker, and ap-pellee, Porpoise Bay, should have known from past dealings that Moorings Realty Sales, Inc., performed the brokerage functions....

...South Florida Securities, Inc., 96 F.2d 964 (5th Cir.1938). If a contract is voidable or unenforceable, the right of the beneficiary is subject to the infirmity. Restatement (Second) of Contracts § 309; 11 Fla.Jur.2d Contracts § 158. Pursuant to section 475.41, the agreement between The Moorings Development Company and Porpoise Bay, appellee, is unenforceable because The Moorings Development Company was not licensed under the State of Florida to perform the services that it promised to perform....

...Surfview Realty, Inc., 400 So.2d 839, 840 (Fla. 5th DCA 1981), relied upon by appellee: The complaint does not allege the ap-pellee is a registered real estate broker. The appellee offered no proof the appel-lee was a registered real estate broker. Section 475.41, Florida Statutes (1977), provides that no contract for a real estate commission is valid unless the broker is registered under the laws of Florida....

...ed to direct or assist in procuring prospects, or in the negotiation or closing of transactions calculated to result in the sale of realty, and the plaintiff failed to obtain a broker’s license, the contract was void and unenforceable by virtue of section 475.41 notwithstanding the fact that the plaintiff was permitted under the contract to hire salesmen and brokers who themselves might have been legally licensed persons....

the agent was barred from re-, covery thereof by § 475.41 Fla.Stat., F.S.A. because the agent was not registered

...He maintains that the actions of Peddie and Clark were those of real estate brokers under section 475.01(3), Florida Statutes, and that since Peddie and Clark were not licensed as real estate brokers, his obligations under his notes to them would be invalid under section 475.41, Florida Statutes, which provides that: No contract for a commission or compensation for any act or service enumerated in s....