DESTROMP
v.
MUSIC
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 District Court adopted a magistrate judge's recommendation to deny the plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis and to dismiss the amended complaint with prejudice in this case against Sony Music and several individuals.
The district court adopted the magistrate judge's report and recommendation in full, denying the motion to proceed in forma pauperis and dismissing the amended complaint with prejudice.
“a district judge may accept, reject, or modify the magistrate judge's report and recommendation”
Establishes the standard of review for magistrate judge recommendations
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff Destromp filed a complaint against Sony Music, Sam Hunt, Hannah Fowler, Brad Belanger, and Robert Lawson. Plaintiff also filed a motion to p…
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 In Forma Pauperis Motion cases and more on FLexlaw
This matter is before the Court on the report and recommendation of Anthony E. Porcelli, United States Magistrate Judge. (Doc. 6). Judge Porcelli recommends the Court deny Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 5) and dismiss the complaint with prejudice. (Doc. 4). No objection to the report and recommendation has been filed, and the time to object 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); Camby v. Davis,718 F. 2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F. 2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982). A district court must “make a de novo determination of those portions of the [report and recommendation] to which an objection is made.”28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). When no
Page 1 of 2
objection is filed, a court reviews the report and recommendation for clear error. Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006); Nettles v. Wainwright, 677 F. 2d 404, 409 (5th Cir. 1982).
After careful consideration of the record, including Judge Porcelli's wellreasoned report and recommendation, the Court adopts the report and recommendation.
Accordingly, it is
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:
1. Judge Porcelli's report and recommendation (Doc. 6) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED and INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE into this Order for all purposes, including appellate review. 2. Plaintiff's motion to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. 5) is DENIED. 3. The Amended Complaint (Doc. 4) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. 4. The Clerk is directed to close this case.
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Tampa, Florida, this 27th day of August, 2024.
JhP.BL TOM BARBER UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Page 2 of 2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Williams v. Louie L. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982)
- Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198 (4th Cir. 1983)