PERRY
v.
GREIDER
AI-generated. These summaries, headnotes, and key points are machine-generated and may contain errors or omissions. Always verify against the full opinion text below. Not legal advice.
Perry sued four judges in federal court. The magistrate judge recommended dismissal without prejudice for failure to diligently prosecute after the plaintiff ignored a court order to file an amended complaint. The district court adopted the recommendation and dismissed the case.
The court dismissed the action without prejudice based on the plaintiff's failure to diligently prosecute the case by ignoring the court's order to file an amended complaint.
[1] A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge's report and recommendation in whole or in part.
[2] In the absence of specific objections to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation, a district judge is not required to review the report de novo.
Previewing 2 of 6 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part," a magistrate judge's R&R.”
Establishes the standard of review for magistrate judge recommendations under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff Perry filed suit against Judges Christine Greider, Margaret O. Steinbeck, Thomas Wild Guthrie, and Michael Brown. The court issued an order …
The full statement of facts, procedural history, and disposition for this case are member content.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence© FLexlaw, Inc. — AI-generated enrichments are proprietary. All rights reserved.
Explore caselaw by topic → Browse Magistrate Judge'S Report And Recommendation Review cases and more on FLexlaw
Before the Court is Magistrate Judge Kyle C. Dudek's Report and Recommendation (“R&R”). (Doc. 6). Judge Dudek recommends that the Court dismiss this action without prejudice because Plaintiff has not diligently prosecuted this case by ignoring the Court's order to file an amended complaint. Plaintiff has not objected to the R&R, and the time to do so has expired. The R&R is ripe for review.
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part," a magistrate judge's R&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). In the absence of specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review the
R&R de novo. See Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F. 2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993). Instead, when parties don't object, a district court need only correct plain error as demanded by the interests of justice. See, e.g., Symonette v. V.A. Leasing Corp., 648 F. App'x 787, 790 (11th Cir. 2016); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150-52 (1985). Plain error exists if (1) “an error occurred”; (2) “the error was plain"; (3) “it affected substantial rights"; and (4) “not correcting the error would seriously affect the fairness of the judicial proceedings." Farley v. Nationwide Mut. Ins., 197 F. 3d 1322, 1329 (11th Cir. 1999).
After careful consideration and an independent review of the case, the Court finds no plain error. So, it accepts and adopts the R&R in full. Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
1. Judge Dudek's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 6) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED, and the findings incorporated herein.
2. This action is DISMISSED without prejudice.
3. The Clerk is DIRECTED to deny any pending motions as moot, terminate any deadlines, and close the case.
DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on February 25, 2025.
Sheri Polster Rappell
SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies: All Parties of Record