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, & Title Insurance Update: Week Ending August 13, 2021

Real Property Update

  • Summary Judgment / Refutation of Defenses: Plaintiff creditor was not entitled to summary judgment for failure to factually refute all defenses raised by debtor – OTI Fiber LLC v. CenterState Bank, N.A., No. 2D20-1196 (Fla. 2d DCA Aug. 11, 2021) (reversed and remanded)
  • Foreclosure Dismissal / Res Judicata: Agreed order granting borrower’s motion for involuntary dismissal, which reflected that “defendant shall go hence without delay” and did not state the intent of the court and parties that it be without prejudice, was final, conclusive, and could not be amended after one year of entry, resulting in res judicata effect that bars subsequent claim – Castro v. Sun ’N Lake of Sebring Improvement Dist., No. 2D20-1102 (Fla. 2d DCA Aug. 13, 2021) (affirmed, in part, reversed in part, remanded for taxation of costs)

Financial Services Update

  • FCRA / Sufficiency of Allegations: Borrowers stated sufficient claim under FCRA that credit reporting was inaccurate when they believed they were enrolled in auto payments, despite servicer’s allegation that it sent them notice that their auto pay enrollment failed, which was outside four corners of complaint – Abukhodeir v. Amerihome Mortg. Co., No. 8:21-cv-00563 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 10, 2021) (denying furnisher’s motion to dismiss)
  • TCPA: District court erred in dismissing TCPA claim for robocall to cellphone with prerecorded message on the basis that message was not advertising or telemarketing; any call to a cellphone using an ATDS or artificial or prerecorded voice requires prior express consent – Loyhayem v. Fraser Fin. & Ins. Servs., Inc., No. 20-56014 (9th Cir. Aug. 10, 2021) (reversing dismissal of complaint)

  • FCRA / Damages: Consumer failed to demonstrate any actual damages showing that her credit score was affected by alleged FCRA violations, and thus claim failed for lack of actual damages – Napoleon v. 5665 Sunrise Highway Corp., No. 2:18-cv-05703 (E.D.N.Y. July 7, 2021) (granting defendant’s motion for summary judgment)

Title Insurance Update

  • No cases to report.
©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.