Summary
noting that the initial pleading gave "ample notice that the foreclosure was instigated by the debt collecting law firm" and ruling that motions, verifications, and other discovery documents were covered under the exception
Summary of this case from Rivas v. Pollack & Rosen, P.A.Opinion
Case No. 6:04-cv-761-Orl-28DAB.
January 18, 2006
ORDER
This case is before the Court on Defendant' Marie D. Campbell, Gregg Dreilinger, and the Law Offices of David J. Stern, P.A., Motion to Dismiss Third Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 104), Citimortgage, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss Third Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 105), and Citibank, Federal Savings Bank's Motion to Dismiss Third Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 116). The United States Magistrate Judge has submitted a report recommending that these motions be granted in part.
After an independent de novo review of the record in this matter, and considering the responses filed, the Court agrees entirely with the findings of fact and conclusions of law in the Report and Recommendation. Therefore, it is ORDERED as follows:
1. That the Report and Recommendation filed November 4, 2005 (Doc. No. 132) is ADOPTED and CONFIRMED and made a part of this Order.
2. Defendant' Marie D. Campbell, Gregg Dreilinger, and the Law Offices of David J. Stern, P.A., Motion to Dismiss Third Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 104), Citimortage, Inc.'s Motion to Dismiss Third Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 105), and Citibank, Federal Savings Bank's Motion to Dismiss Third Amended Complaint (Doc. No. 116) are GRANTED in part. Specifically, Plaintiff's federal and Florida RICO claims (Counts I and II) and his FDUTPA claim (Count V), are DISMISSED with prejudice. The portion of the motions to dismiss seeking dismissal of Plaintiff's FDCPA and Florida Consumer Credit Protection Act claims (Counts III and IV) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part, specifically Plaintiff's claims in ¶¶ 133 (b), (c), (e), (f)-(i) are DISMISSED with prejudice. Plaintiff's claims in ¶¶ 133 (a) and (d) remain.
DONE and ORDERED