Ford v. Niemi et al

PAMELA FORD,
Plaintiff,
V .
ELIZABETH S. NIEMI,
Defendant.
UNITED STA TES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
Case No. 24-81585-CV-Middlebrooks
I
--------- 	------- 	--- -
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
This cause is before the Court upon Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (DE
77). 	The Petition was referred to Magistrate Judge Bruce E. Reinhart. (DE 56). On October 31 ,
2025 , Judge Reinhart entered a Report and Recommendation ("Report") (DE 81), recommending
that Plaintiffs Motion for Partial Summary Judgment be denied. Plaintiff filed her objections on
November 10 , 2025. (DE 85).
I have reviewed the Report, the record, Petitioner' s objections, and relevant caselaw. I find
that Judge Reinhart' s findings are well-reasoned and supported by the record. Plaintiffs objections
largely restate arguments previously raised and do not demonstrate that the Magistrate Judge
applied an incorrect standard or overlooked controlling precedent.
Plaintiff argues that the Magistrate Judge misapplied the legal standard by requiring her to
prove that Defendant Niemi had no legitimate lien interest whatsoever. I disagree. The Magistrate
Judge correctly interpreted the plain language of Florida Statute § 817 .535(8)(b), which requires a
finding that the instrument contains a materially false, fictitious, or fraudulent statement "such that
the instrument does not establish a legitimate property or lien interest." This language imposes a
Case 9:24-cv-81585-DMM Document 87 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/14/2025 Page 1 of 2

higher threshold than mere exaggeration or error; it requires that the falsehood materially vitiate
the legitimacy of the lien itself.
I further agree that Plaintiff has not met her burden under Rule 56 . The record contains
conflicting evidence regarding the amount owed, the nature of the services provided, and whether
any portion of the lien was valid under § 713 .65. While Plaintiff emphasizes Niemi ' s admissions
and the inclusion of non-lienable charges, these facts do not conclusively establish that Niemi
lacked any legitimate lien interest. As the Magistrate Judge noted, a reasonable fact finder could
conclude that some debt was owed, and thus some lien interest may have existed.
For these reasons, and for the reasons explained in Judge Reinhart' s well-reasoned Report,
I deny Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that
1) 	Plaintiff's Objections (DE 85) to Judge Reinhart' s Report are OVERRULED.
2) 	Judge Reinhart' s Report (DE 81) is ADOPTED.
3) 	Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (DE 77) is DENIED.
SIGNED in Chambers at West Palm Beach, Florida, t •
D 	ALD M. MIDDLEBROOKS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies to: Counsel of Record
Case 9:24-cv-81585-DMM Document 87 Entered on FLSD Docket 11/14/2025 Page 2 of 2