JOHNSON
v.
GOULD
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 adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, dismissing the Plaintiff's Amended Complaint with prejudice.
Plaintiff filed an Amended Complaint, to which a Magistrate Judge recommended dismissal with prejudice. Plaintiff filed objections to this recommendat…
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 cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court for consideration of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint. (Dkt. 4). On April 8, 2024, United States Magistrate Judge Thomas G. Wilson issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending the Amended Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. (Dkt. 7) On May 3, 2024, Plaintiff filed her objections to the Report and Recommendation. (Dkt. 8)
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. 7), is CONFIRMED and ADOPTED as part of this Order. 2. Plaintiff's Amended Complaint, (Dkt. 4), is DISMISSED WITH
PREJUDICE.
3. This case is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Any pending motions are DENIED as moot. The Clerk is directed to CLOSE this case.
DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 17th day of October 2024.
MARY S. SCRIVEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Any Unrepresented Person
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)