ALEXANDER
v.
WELLS
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.
A district court adopted a magistrate judge's recommendation to dismiss pro se plaintiff Dominic Alexander's complaint with prejudice for failure to meet Rule 8(a)(2) pleading requirements and denied his motion to proceed in forma pauperis due to incompleteness.
The district court adopted the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation in full. Alexander's complaint was dismissed with prejudice for failure to meet Rule 8(a)(2) requirements, and his motion to proceed in forma pauperis was denied as incomplete.
[1] A district court must conduct a de novo review of a magistrate judge's legal conclusions, even in the absence of an objection.
[2] A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge's report and recommendation.
Previewing 2 of 5 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 a magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation.”
Establishes the standard of review for magistrate judge reports under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDominic Alexander, proceeding pro se, filed a complaint against Charles R. Wells in the Middle District of Florida. A United States Magistrate Judge i…
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 Legal Conclusions cases and more on FLexlaw
In a November 6, 2024, report (Doc. 3), the United States Magistrate Judge recommends dismissal of pro se Plaintiff Dominic Alexander's complaint with prejudice, and denial of his motion to proceed in forma pauperis. The deadline to object has passed without an objection.
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). If a party files a timely and specific objection to a finding of fact by a magistrate judge, the district court must conduct a de novo review of that factual issue. Stokes v. Singletary, 952 F. 2d 1567, 1576 (11th Cir. 1992). The district court reviews legal conclusions de novo, even absent an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F. 3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Ashworth v. Glades Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs, 379 F. Supp. 3d 1244, 1246 (M.D. Fla. 2019).
In the absence of any objection and after reviewing the factual allegations and legal conclusions, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation.
Alexander's complaint does not meet the requirements of Rule 8(a)(2), and his motion to proceed in forma pauperis is incomplete.
Accordingly, the following is ORDERED:
1. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 3) is ADOPTED and made a part of this Order for all purposes.
2. Alexander's complaint is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
3. The Clerk is directed to CLOSE this case.
ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on November 25, 2024.
Kathryn Kimball Mizelle United States District Judge
2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Marina Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603 (11th Cir. 1994)
- Ashworth v. Glades Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs, 379 F. Supp. 3d 1244 (M.D. Fla. 2019)