Dennis v. American Medical Express Corp.
Opinion
Wayne E. Dennis and Stormy Investments, Inc. appeal a summary final judgment in a mortgage foreclosure case. We affirm.
Defendants-appellants Dennis and Stormy Investments first contend that the trial court should have disqualified opposing counsel. We concur with plaintiff-ap-pellee American Medical Express Corp. that the applicable rules are rules 4-1.10(b) and (c), of the Rules Regulating the Florida Bar, and that disqualification was not called for under the circumstances of this case. See Nissan Motor Corp. v. Orozco, 595 So.2d 240, 242-43 (Fla. 4th DCA 1992).
Defendants next contend that the trial court erred by granting summary judgment against them on their counterclaim.1 We entirely agree that the appel-lee was entitled to summary judgment under the Federal and Florida Fair Debt Collection Practices Acts, see 15 U.S.C. § 1692a(5), (6); § 559.55(1), (6), Fla. Stat. (1995), and that there was no slander of title. See Palmer v. Shelby Plaza Motel, Inc., 443 So.2d 285, 286 (Fla. 2d DCA 1983).
Affirmed.
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
763 So. 2d 392 (Dennis v. American Medical Express Corp.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.