Case Name: Dione MORRIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SHEEHAN BUICK PONTIAC GMC, INC., Defendant-Appellee
Court: United States Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit
Jurisdiction: United States
Decision Date: 2013-04-18
Citations: 517 F. App'x 686
Docket Number: No. 12-12208
Parties: Dione MORRIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SHEEHAN BUICK PONTIAC GMC, INC., Defendant-Appellee.
Judges: Before DUBINA, Chief Judge, BARKETT and FAY, Circuit Judges.
Reporter: West's Federal Appendix
Volume: 517
Pages: 686–687

Head Matter:
Dione MORRIS, Plaintiff-Appellant, v. SHEEHAN BUICK PONTIAC GMC, INC., Defendant-Appellee.
No. 12-12208.
United States Court of Appeals, Eleventh Circuit.
April 18, 2013.
Raymond Gregory Ingalsbe, Raymond G. Ingalsbe, PA, Palm Beach Gardens, FL, for Plaintiff-Appellant.
Clarence Edward McGee, Jr., McGee & Huskey, PA, James G. Salerno, Peterson Bernard, Fort Lauderdale, FL, for Defendant-Appellee.
Before DUBINA, Chief Judge, BARKETT and FAY, Circuit Judges.

Opinion:
PER CURIAM:
PlaintiffiAppellant 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 Re tail Sales Finance Act, FLA. STAT. § § 520.07(2), 520.13, and 520.995(l)(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).
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 filed on March 10, 2012.
AFFIRMED.
. This case was referred to a Magistrate Judge for a Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 et seq.