Sardinas v. M.C.A., Inc.

484 So. 2d 639, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 619, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 6817

Opinion

PER CURIAM.

Agreeing with the trial court that the use of appellants’ images in the prologue to the movie Scarface could not possibly have a defamatory meaning, see Byrd v. Hustler Magazine, Inc., 433 So.2d 593, 595 (Fla. 3d DCA 1983), review denied, 443 So.2d 979 (Fla.1984); Wolfson v. Kirk, 273 So.2d 774, 778 (Fla. 4th DCA), cert. denied, 279 So.2d 32 (Fla.1973); Kurtell & Co. v. Miami Tribune, Inc., 193 So.2d 471 (Fla. 3d DCA 1967), or constitute an invasion of privacy, see Jacova v. Southern Radio & Television Co., 83 So.2d 34, 40 (Fla.1955); Boyles v. Mid-Florida Television Corp., 431 So.2d 627, 637 (Fla. 5th DCA 1983), aff'd, 467 So.2d 282 (Fla.1985); Stafford v. Hayes, 327 So.2d 871 (Fla. 1st DCA), cert. denied, 336 So.2d 604 (Fla.1976), we affirm the lower court’s dismissal with prejudice of the complaint.

Affirmed.