Dione Morris v. Sheehan Buick Pontiac GMC, Inc., No. 12-12208 (11th Cir. 2013)
Annotate this Case
Download PDF
Case: 12-12208 Date Filed: 04/18/2013 Page: 1 of 3 [DO NOT PUBLISH] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE ELEVENTH CIRCUIT _____________ No. 12-12208 _____________ D. C. Docket No. 9:10-cv-80796-WJZ DIONE MORRIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, versus SHEEHAN BUICK PONTIAC GMC, INC., Defendant-Appellee. ______________ Appeal from the United States District Court for the Southern District of Florida ______________ (April 18, 2013) Before DUBINA, Chief Judge, BARKETT and FAY, Circuit Judges. PER CURIAM: Case: 12-12208 Date Filed: 04/18/2013 Page: 2 of 3 Plaintiff/Appellant Dione Morris ( Morris ) appeals the district court s grant of summary judgment in favor of Defendant/Appellee Sheehan Buick Pontiac GMC, Inc., ( Sheehan ) and the denial of Morris s motion for partial summary judgment. The issues presented on appeal are: (1) Whether the district court properly granted summary judgment as to Morris s claims predicated on violations of Florida s Motor Vehicle Retail Sales Finance Act, FLA. STAT. §§ 520.07(2), 520.13, and 520.995(1)(c)? (2) Whether the district court properly granted summary judgment as to Morris s Equal Credit Opportunity Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1691, claim? (3) Whether the district court properly granted summary judgment as to Morris s Florida Uniform Commercial Code, FLA. STAT. § 679.601, claim? (4) Whether the district court properly granted summary judgment as to Morris s constitutional challenge? We review de novo a district court s rulings on cross-motions for summary judgment, and the facts are viewed in the light most favorable to the non-moving party on each motion. Chavez v. Mercantil Commercebank, N.A., 701 F.3d 896, 899 (11th Cir. 2012) (citations omitted). 2 Case: 12-12208 Date Filed: 04/18/2013 Page: 3 of 3 After reviewing the record, reading the parties briefs and having the benefit of oral argument, we affirm the district court s order denying Morris s motion for partial summary judgment and granting Sheehan s motion for summary judgment based on the thorough and well-reasoned Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge 1 filed on March 10, 2012. AFFIRMED. 1 This case was referred to a Magistrate Judge for a Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 et seq. 3
Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
