Opinion
Rehearing Denied Dec. 10, 1974.
Robert Gordon, Golden, for plaintiffs-appellants.
John P. Moore, Atty. Gen., John E. Bush, Deputy Atty. Gen., Roger H. Allott, State Sol. Gen., Michael B. Gorham, Sp. Asst. Atty. Gen., Denver, for defendants-appellees.
BERMAN, Judge.
The Colorado Real Estate Commission filed charges against plaintiff Robert M. Gordon, Jr., alleging that he had violated certain provisions of C.R.S.1963, 117--1--12 et seq. After a hearing, the hearing officer recommended that Gordon's real estate broker's license be suspended for a period of not less than one calendar year. This recommendation was adopted by the Commission which, on November 28, 1972, ordered that Gordon's license be suspended for one year beginning December 11, 1972. No stay of the suspension was requested by Gordon, which relief is authorized by 1969 Perm.Supp., C.R.S.1963, 117--1--13(5).
In January of 1973, Gordon initiated this action seeking review of the Commission's action, C.R.C.P. 106. In his complaint, he requested that the action be held 'in abeyance' until this court ruled on a similar case which it then had before it. The case which Gordon used as the reason for requesting a delay of the review, Cline v. Colorado Real Estate Commission, Colo.App., 513 P.2d 1072 (not officially published), was decided by this court on June 19, 1973. On December 3, 1973, holding that the 'Findings, Conclusions and Recommendations' of the hearing officer adopted by the Commission were supported by the evidence, the district court dismissed Gordon's complaint. On December 13, 1973, Gordon filed his motion for rehearing before the district court, and upon its denial this appeal followed. The Commission urges that we dismiss the appeal because the matter is now moot. We agree.
At the time that Gordon filed his motion for rehearing in the district court, his period of suspension had expired and his license had been returned to him. The case when filed in this court was moot, and since there is no constitutional question involved and the matter presented is of private rather than of great public importance, the matter is not entitled to review. See Van DeVegt v. County Commissioners, 98 Colo. 161, 55 P.2d 703; Parker v. People, 135 Colo. 206, 309 P.2d 605. The matter being moot, the appeal is dismissed.
PIERCE and STERNBERG, JJ., concur.