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

District Court of Appeal of Florida

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

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

CourtDistrict Court of Appeal of Florida

DecidedMarch 11, 1986

DocketNo. 85-1825

StatusPublished

This text of 484 So. 2d 639 (Sardinas v. M.C.A., Inc.) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court of Appeal of Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Sardinas v. M.C.A., Inc., 484 So. 2d 639, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 619, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 6817 (Fla. Ct. App. 1986).

Pincite

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.

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

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.

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

484 So. 2d 639, 11 Fla. L. Weekly 619, 1986 Fla. App. LEXIS 6817, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/sardinas-v-mca-inc-fladistctapp-1986.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack