Shot-koski’s position. In United National Bank v. Airport Plaza Ltd. Partnership, 537 So.2d 608 (Fla.Dist.Ct.App.1988), however, the court specifically addressed and rejected the same argument made by Shotkoski here, namely, that an illegal agreement for real estate brokerage services, by itself, requires rescission of the entire contract. There, the bank filed a foreclosure action after a default in payments. As a defense to the foreclosure action, the defendant raised several alternative bases for rescission, including the fact that the management agreement between the original parties required brokerage services to be performed. The defendant maintained that the failure of a party to obtain a valid broker’s license before execution of the agreement rendered the entire real esta 1967)(<HOLDING>). The reasoning of these courts is consistent
holding that an attorney approval clause in a contract for the sale of real estate was a part of that contract and would have to be satisfied for the underlying contract to be enforceable holding that a contract for sale of real estate was not void where the broker failed to obtain the required licenses holding that the validity of a contract for a commission for the sale of real estate is determined by the law of the state where the contract is made holding the real estate sale proceeds holding that the purchaser could bring a 93a claim against the real estate broker because the broker misinformed the plaintiff as to the acreage of the parcel and failed to disclose that the property was encumbered