CopyCited 3 times | Published | Florida 2nd District Court of Appeal | 1999 WL 540308
...oyment contract as a matter of law. Had it done so, it should have found that the contract was an improper agreement to require Mr. Paoli to make commission payments to Natherson & Co. on funds earned from the former company clients, in violation of section 473.3205, Florida Statutes (1993)....
...strue the provision in accord with the ordinary meaning of the language. See Emergency Assoc. of Tampa, P.A. v. Sassano,
664 So.2d 1000 (Fla. 2d DCA 1995). In interpreting this contract, the court erred by allowing the jury to consider the effect of section
473.3205, Florida Statutes (1993), upon the plain meaning of the contract language....
...However, this section shall not prohibit: (1) Payments for the purchase of an accounting practice. Of significance is the fact that in their original counterclaim the Natherson defendants attempted to enforce paragraph 3 as a liquidated damages agreement. The trial court found, however, that section 473.3205 barred a liquidated damages clause....
CopyPublished | Florida 1st District Court of Appeal | 2001 Fla. App. LEXIS 15634, 2001 WL 1355310
...t in Paoli v. Natherson & Co., P.A.,
750 So.2d 46 (Fla. 2d DCA 1999). Accordingly, we reverse. I. The trial court ruled that Paragraph D of the Agreement is illegal because it is an agreement for Pappas to pay commissions, which is prohibited by section
473.3205, Florida Statutes, as construed by the court in Paoli . 1 Section
473.3205 provides: Commissions....
...nsee or the client in connection with an engagement. The court in Paoli ruled that an accounting firm’s employment contract, with a provision similar to the one at issue in this case, was an agreement to pay commissions and therefore illegal under section 473.3205. The accounting firm in Paoli argued that the agreement should be construed as an agreement to purchase the accounting practice so that the first exception in section 473.3205 applied....
...Appellants do not argue that an exception applies, rather they assert that Pap-pas’ payments and their receipts of his payments under Paragraph D should not be construed as commissions. We agree. Because the provisions of Paragraph D should not be considered as commissions under the general rule of section 473.3205, the exceptions are not applicable and need not be addressed....
...ices and to refer employee leasing clients to Sunshine, and in return Sunshine agreed to pay Professional Planning commissions.”). Paragraph D is not the type of agreement described in Professional Planning Services, that would be prohibited under section 473.3205....
