Disclaimer

The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.

 Skip to Content

Real Property & Financial Services Update: Week Ending August 16, 2019
August 16, 2019

Real Property Update

  • Construction / Statute of Repose: the installation of an attic ladder is an improvement to real property; thus, the ten-year statute of repose of section 95.11(3)(c) applies - Harrell v. The Ryland Group, No. 1D18-3728 (Fla. 1st DCA Aug. 13, 2019) (affirmed)
  • Standing / Land Use: the transfer of property ownership to a third party did not divest the former owner of standing to maintain an action, where the former owner retained sufficient interest in the controversy affected by the outcome of the litigation - Pirate's Treasure, Inc. v. City of Dunedin, Florida, No. 2D18-2774 (Fla. 2nd DCA Aug. 16, 2019) (reversed and remanded)

Financial Services Update

  • TCPA / Revocation of Consent: a consumer may not unilaterally revoke his prior consent to receive calls from a loan servicer using an auto-dialer or pre-recorded message where the consumer previously provided the consent as part of a settlement agreement which placed restrictions on future revocation of consent - Lucoff v. Navient Solutions, LLC, No. 18-CIV-60743-RAR (S.D. Fla. Aug. 7, 2019).
  • FDUTPA / Deceptive Conduct Relating to Fee Retention / Nationwide Class Action: the Southern District of Florida denied, in part, an airline's motion to dismiss a FDUTPA claim brought by a consumer who alleged that the airline accepted what she described as an illegal kickback because the airline retained a portion of the fee a third-party charged for trip insurance without disclosing it to the consumer. However, the court granted the airline's motion to dismiss the consumer's nationwide class allegations premised on FDUTPA because the law applies only to actions that occur within the state of Florida - Dolan v. Jetblue Airways Corp., No. 18-62193-Civ-Scola (S.D. Fla. May 28, 2019).
Related Practices
Real Property Litigation Consumer Finance
©2024 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.