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 adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, granting the Receiver's unopposed fee application.
The Receiver applied for fees and costs for services rendered during a specific quarterly period. A Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendatio…
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 Clear Error Review cases and more on FLexlaw
Motion be granted. (Dkt. 1133) The Motion is unopposed and good cause has been demonstrated.
In the Eleventh Circuit, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify the magistrate judge's report and recommendation after conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F. 2d 732, 732 (11th Cir. 1982). 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. 1133), is CONFIRMED and
2
ADOPTED as part of this Order.
2. The Receiver's Unopposed Sixteenth Quarterly Fee Application for Order Awarding Fees and Reimbursement of Costs to Receiver and His Professionals, (Dkt. 1089), is GRANTED.
3. Fees and costs shall be awarded in the following amounts: a. The Receiver, in the amount of $83,270.92; b. Guerra & Partners, P.A., in the amount of $51,930.90; c. Johnson, Newlon & DeCort, in the amount of $54,506.19; d. Jared J. Perez, P.A., in the amount of $1,820.00; e. Yip Associates, in the amount of $21,694.50; f. PDR, in the amount of $26,536.24; g. E-Hounds, Inc., in the amount of $6,945.00; h. Johnson, Pope, Bokor, Ruppel & Burns, LLP in the amount of $303.00; i. Omni, in the amount of $23,140.30; and j. RWJ, in the amount of $1,431.00.
DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, this 21st day of May 2024.
Copies furnished to: Counsel of Record Any Unrepresented Person
MARY S SCRIVEN
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
3
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)
- Williams v. Louie L. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982)
- Ga. Power Co. v. Int'l Bhd. OF Elec. Workers, 896 F.2d 507 (11th Cir. 1990)