ODONOGHUE
v.
GUFFORD

M.D. Fla. | 2024-07-29
No. 2:24-cv-00479
2024 FFL 16674 District Court, M.D. Florida (2024)

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.

Synopsis

The District Court for the Middle District of Florida accepted and adopted a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation dismissing plaintiff Odonoghue's complaint without prejudice for lack of prosecution. The plaintiff did not file objections to the recommendation within the statutory period.


Holding

The District Court accepted and adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation in full, dismissing the complaint without prejudice for lack of prosecution.


Headnotes

[1] A district court reviews de novo those portions of a magistrate judge's report to which specific written objections are made.

[2] A district court may accept a magistrate judge's recommendation without de novo review if no objections are filed, provided there is no clear error on the face of the rec…

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

Key Quotes

“A district judge "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge."”

Establishes the district court's authority to review and act upon magistrate judge recommendations 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 intelligence

Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff filed a complaint against defendant Charles P. Gufford in the District Court for the Middle District of Florida. A Magistrate Judge issued a…

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.


Opinion of the Court

Before the Court is United States Magistrate Judge Kyle C. Dudek's Report and Recommendation (“R&R”). (Doc. 7). Judge Dudek recommends dismissing the Complaint (Doc. 1) without prejudice for lack of prosecution. (Id.) Plaintiff did not object, and the time to do so passed.

A district judge “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F. 2d 732, 732 (11th Cir. 1982). Without a specific objection, the judge has no obligation to review factual findings de novo. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F. 2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993). But the district court reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry., 37 F. 3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994).

After examining the file independently and upon considering Judge Dudek's findings and recommendations, the Court accepts and adopts the Report and Recommendation in full.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED:

The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 7) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED and the findings incorporated herein.

(1) The Complaint (Doc. 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice.

(2) The Clerk is DIRECTED to enter judgment accordingly, deny any pending motions as moot, terminate any deadlines, and close the case.

DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on July 29, 2024.

Sheri Polster Rappell SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies: All Parties of Record


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw