From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Cintron v. Bankers Trust Company

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Oct 30, 1996
682 So. 2d 616 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

Opinion

No. 96-00657.

October 30, 1996.

Appeal from the Circuit Court, Lee County, James R. Thompson, J.

Cathy L. Lucrezi, Fort Myers, for Appellants.

Anthony F. Sanchez and James W. Moore of Taylor, Brion, Buker Greene, Miami, for Appellee.


Miguel and Ruth Cintron appeal a summary judgment in favor of Bankers Trust Company in this foreclosure action. Because there was a disputed issue of material fact regarding a violation of the federal Truth in Lending Act, we reverse.

Miguel and Ruth Cintron correctly argue that they were entitled to receive two copies each of the notice of their rescission rights. See Yslas v. D.K Guenther Builders, Inc., 342 So.2d 859 (Fla. 2d DCA 1977) (holding that right to receive rescission notice applies separately to each person obligated under transaction). Bankers Trust contends the Cintrons signed a written acknowledgement that they received their copies at closing. In its order, the trial court found that these documents established the Cintrons received two copies.

The Truth in Lending Act provides that "written acknowledgement of receipt of any disclosures required under this subchapter . . . does no more than create a rebuttable presumption of delivery thereof" 15 U.S.C. § 1635 (c). In their filed affidavits, the Cintrons sufficiently rebutted this presumption. Because this created a disputed issue of material fact, the trial court erred in granting summary judgment. See, e.g., Stone v. Mehlberg, 728 F. Supp. 1341 (W.D.Mich. 1989); Award Lumber Constr. Co., Inc. v. Humphries, 110 Ill. App.3d 119, 65 Ill.Dec. 676, 441 N.E.2d 1190 (1982). Accordingly, we reverse the summary judgment granted on the issue of rescission notices.

As to the Cintrons' second issue, we find no error in that portion of the order granting summary judgment on the alleged violation regarding inadequate disclosure of the amount financed. Therefore, we affirm that portion of the order.

Reversed in part, affirmed in part and remanded.

CAMPBELL, A.C.J., and FULMER, J., concur.


Summaries of

Cintron v. Bankers Trust Company

District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District
Oct 30, 1996
682 So. 2d 616 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)
Case details for

Cintron v. Bankers Trust Company

Case Details

Full title:MIGUEL A. CINTRON AND RUTH CINTRON, APPELLANTS, v. BANKERS TRUST COMPANY…

Court:District Court of Appeal of Florida, Second District

Date published: Oct 30, 1996

Citations

682 So. 2d 616 (Fla. Dist. Ct. App. 1996)

Citing Cases

Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. v. Markley

"The case law of other jurisdictions is well settled that a debtor's affidavit averring non-delivery is…

U.S. Bank Nat'l Ass'n v. Jung Hoon Kim

The case law of other jurisdictions is well settled that a debtor's affidavit averring non-delivery is…