KAINTZ
v.
THE GOODMAN GROUP, INC.
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 grants final approval of the class settlement, adopting the Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation in part.
Plaintiff filed a motion for final approval of a class settlement. The Magistrate Judge recommended granting the motion. Neither party objected to the…
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 Common Fund Doctrine cases and more on FLexlaw
individually and on behalf of all others similarly situated,
Plaintiff, v. Case No. 8:20-cv-2115-VMC-AAS THE GOODMAN GROUP, INC.,
Defendant. ______________________________/
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court upon consideration of United States Magistrate Judge Amanda Arnold Sansone’s Report and Recommendation. (Doc. # 45). The Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 45), filed on August 9, 2021, recommends that Plaintiff Rob Kaintz’s unopposed Motion for Final Approval of Class Settlement (Doc. # 36) be granted. The parties have filed a joint notice indicating that neither of them objects to the Report and Recommendation. (Doc. # 47). The Court accepts and adopts in part the Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 45), and grants Kaintz’s unopposed Motion for Final Approval of Class Settlement (Doc. # 36). The Report and Recommendation is adopted in all respects except insofar as it provides that the Court retains jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement. (Doc. # 45 at 5). Discussion 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 (11th Cir. 1982). If a party files a timely and specific objection to a finding of fact by the magistrate judge, the district court must conduct a de novo review with respect to that factual issue. Stokes v. Singletary, 952 F. 2d 1567, 1576 (11th Cir. 1992). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F. 3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Castro Bobadilla v. Reno, 826 F. Supp. 1428, 1431-32 (S.D. Fla. 1993), aff’d, 28 F. 3d 116 (11th Cir. 1994). Upon due consideration of the record, the Court adopts in substantive part the Report and Recommendation. The Court agrees with Judge Sansone’s detailed and well-reasoned findings of fact and conclusions of law. The Report and
Recommendation thoughtfully addresses the issues presented, and neither party has objected to the Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED: (1) The Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 45) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED except insofar as it provides that the Court retains jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the class action settlement agreement. The Court declines to retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement. (2) Plaintiff Rob Kaintz’s unopposed Motion for Final Approval of Class Settlement (Doc. # 36) is GRANTED. (3) The Clerk is directed to CLOSE the case. DONE and ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Florida, this 23rd day of August, 2021.
VIRGINIA M. HERNANDEZ’COVINGTON
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Williams v. Louie L. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982)
- Castro Bobadilla v. Reno, 1993 WL 259424 (S.D. Fla. 1993)
- Durham Eldon Stokes v. Singletary, 952 F.2d 1567 (11th Cir. 1992)