SECURITIES AND EXCHANGE COMMISSION
v.
DAVISON
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.
The Court adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, granting the Receiver's unopposed fee application.
The Receiver applied for fees and costs for services rendered from April 1, 2024, to June 30, 2024, including previously held-back fees. A Magistrate …
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
the Receiver's Motion be granted. (Dkt. 1229) No party has filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation, and the deadline to do so has expired.
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F. 2d 732, 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983). A district judge "shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). This requires that the district judge "give fresh consideration to those issues to which specific objection has been made by a party.” Jeffrey S. v. State Bd. of Educ., 896 F. 2d 507, 512 (11th Cir.1990) (quoting H.R. 1609, 94th Cong. § 2 (1976)). In the absence of specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review factual findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F. 2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993), and the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry., 37 F. 3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994).
Upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation, in conjunction with an independent examination of the file, the Court is of the opinion that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects. Accordingly, it is ORDERED that:
1. The Report and Recommendation, (Dkt. 1229), is CONFIRMED and
2
ADOPTED as part of this Order.
2. The Receiver's Unopposed Eighteenth Quarterly Fee Application for Order Awarding Fees and Reimbursement of Costs to Receiver and His Professionals, (Dkt. 1210), is GRANTED.
3. Fees and costs shall be awarded in the following amounts: a. The Receiver, in the amount of $75,283.94; b. G&P, in the amount of $17,550.00; c. JND, in the amount of $24,730.14; d. Jared J. Perez, P.A., in the amount of $7,420.00; e. Yip, in the amount of $833.00; f. PDR, in the amount of $19,818.66; g. E-Hounds, in the amount of $6,945.00; h. Omni, in the amount of $17,394.65; and i. RWJ, in the amount of $1,341.00.
DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 22nd day of November 2024.
Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Any Unrepresented Person
3
MARY S SORIVEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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)
- Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776 (11th Cir. 1993)
- Coleman v. City of Winston-Salem, 459 U.S. 1112 (U.S. 1983)