In Richards v. Gordon (1967) 254 Cal.App.2d 735, the commissioner filed an accusation against a licensee on the basis of a final judgment against him in a civil action ordering rescission of a contract for the exchange of real properties by reason of the licensee's fraud and misrepresentation. Upon the hearing, evidence was excluded which assertedly would have impeached the prior finding of fraud and misrepresentation, and the licensee was limited to a showing of rehabilitation or mitigation. The court held that the evidence was properly excluded under the doctrine of res judicata, since the issues decided in the underlying proceeding were identical with those sought to be litigated. ( Id., at p. 739.) Invoking the principle that " any construction of a statute leading to absurd consequences is to be avoided," the court stated, "such would be the result if a de novo hearing were compelled with the accompanying necessity of attendance by all witnesses to a prior superior court proceeding which had determined all the material facts in controversy." ( Id., at p. 741.) Except for inquiry limited to the mitigating circumstances, if any, involved in the transaction, the court concluded, "any offer of proof in impeachment of the prior judgment should be rejected." ( Id., at p. 742.)