Appeal from the Order of the Pennsylvania State Real Estate Commission in the case of In The Matter of the Suspension or Revocation of the License to Practice as a Real Estate Broker, License No. AB-023879-A, at Complaint No. 76-RE-768.
William J. Fair, for petitioner.
Joseph S. Rengert, Assistant Attorney General, with him James J. Kutz, Chief Counsel, and Edward G. Biester, Jr., Attorney General, for respondents.
Judges Blatt, Craig, and Williams, Jr., sitting as a panel of three. Opinion by Judge Williams, Jr. This decision was reached prior to the expiration of the term of office of Judge Wilkinson, Jr.
[ 58 Pa. Commw. Page 138]
This is a Petition for Review filed by Clark John Harrington (Petitioner) from an Order of the State Real Estate Commission (Commission) which revoked the Petitioner's real estate license.
The Petitioner has been a licensed real estate broker since May 20, 1970. On February 24, 1975, he was convicted in Federal Court of bribery and conspiracy. As a result of these convictions, on May 29, 1979, the Commission issued a citation and notice of hearing on the Petitioner to show cause why his real estate license should not be revoked pursuant to Sections 10(a) and 11(b) of the Real Estate Brokers License Act (Act).*fn1 These sections provide for revocation
[ 58 Pa. Commw. Page 139]
of the real estate license of a licensee who is convicted of such offenses.
A hearing was held on June 29, 1979, before the Commission. Although the Petitioner's attorney had filed an Answer to the Commission's citation, neither the Petitioner nor his attorney appeared at the hearing. On December 5, 1979, the Commission issued Findings of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and an Order revoking the Petitioner's license pursuant to Section 11(b) of the Act. Petitioner seeks review of that Order by this Court.
It is clear from the record that the Commission bases its revocation of Petitioner's license solely on Section 11(b) of the Act; the Commission's Conclusion of Law, Number 5, establishes that the evidence provided by this record is insufficient to support any violations of Section 10(a).*fn2 Therefore, this Court's review will be confined to the provisions of Section 11(b).
Section 11(b) provides as follows:
(b) Where during the term of any license issued by the department, the licensee shall have pleaded guilty, or entered a plea of nolo contendere, or has been found guilty in a court of competent jurisdiction, in this or any other state, of forgery, embezzlement, obtaining money under false pretenses, extortion, criminal conspiracy to defraud, bribery, or other ...