Skip to Content

Real Property, Financial Services, & Title Insurance Update: Week Ending April 23, 2021
April 23, 2021

Real Property Update

  • Condo / Attorneys’ Fees: Condominium association that lost on counterclaim against developer was prevailing party on significant issues in litigation by prevailing on developer’s claims and was entitled to attorneys’ fees under declaration – Carrollwood Cove at Emerald Greens Condo. Ass’n, Inc. v. Carrollwood Cove, LLC, No. 2D20-697 (Fla. 2d DCA Apr. 23, 2021) (reversed and remanded)
  • Satisfaction of Mortgage: Obligation to execute a satisfaction of mortgage does not occur until the mortgage is fully paid, and the statute imposes an obligation to send or cause to be sent a recorded satisfaction after receipt of full payment – Richeson v. South’s Custom Constr., Inc., Nos. 5D20-1496, 5D20-2399 (Fla. 5th DCA Apr. 23, 2021) (reversed and remanded)

Financial Services Update

  • FDCPA / FCCPA / Standing: Debt collector’s transmittal of consumer’s debt information to third-party vendor gives rise to a concrete injury under Article III based on statutory violation, and gives rise to a violation of 15 U.S.C. § 1692c(b) by transmitting consumers’ personal information to third party in connection with collection of debt – Hunstein v. Preferred Collection & Mgmt. Servs., Inc., No. 19-14434 (11th Cir. Apr. 21, 2021) (reversing district court’s dismissal and remanding for further proceedings)

  • TCPA / Pleading Use of ATDS: Consumer plausibly alleged that text messages were sent from ATDS because of near-instantaneous response to “stop” message and the use of an 844 number not registered to any individual – Matthews v. Mid City Cannabis Club, Inc., No. 2:20-cv-07841 (C.D. Cal. Mar. 2, 2021) (denying motion to dismiss)

  • FDCPA: Debt collector did not violate FDCPA by continuing to report debt on credit reports after consumer claimed identity theft, where debt was reported as disputed and debt collector did not use deceptive means – Blackmon v. Ad Astra Recovery Servs., Inc., No. 3:20-cv-00800 (S.D. Cal. Apr. 20, 2021) (granting summary judgment for defendant and dismissing case with prejudice)

  • FCRA: CRA’s exclusive reliance on ACDV process to investigate claim of identity theft was reasonable under the circumstances where there was no evidence that CRA should have had knowledge that furnisher was unreliable and plaintiff did not provide additional information requested – Huffman v. Experian Info. Sols., Inc., No. 4:19-cv-07408 (N.D. Cal. Apr. 14, 2021) (granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment)

  • TCPA: Consumer’s consent to receive faxes was sufficient to encompass consent to receive fax advertisements – Kaye v. Merck & Co., Inc., No. 20-1097 (2d Cir. Apr. 22, 2021) (affirming summary judgment for defendants)

Title Insurance Update

No cases of interest to report.
Related Practices
Real Property Litigation Consumer Finance Title Insurance
©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.

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.