JORGE A. ZEA
v.
NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF REALTORS, ET AL.
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.
Jorge A. Zea sought a preliminary injunction to compel the National Association of Realtors to comply with its own binding rules. The district court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation and denied Zea's motion for preliminary injunction.
The court denied Zea's motion for preliminary injunction. The district court adopted and approved the magistrate judge's report and recommendation without modification.
[1] A magistrate judge's factual findings are adopted and deemed incorporated into a district court's opinion when no timely objections are filed.
[2] A district court may conduct a de novo review of a magistrate judge's report even in the absence of objections.
Previewing 2 of 3 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“As no timely objections were filed, the Magistrate Judge's factual findings in the Report [DE 78] are hereby adopted and deemed incorporated into this opinion.”
Establishes the standard for adopting a magistrate judge's report when no objections are timely filed
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe opinion does not provide detailed facts, as it primarily adopts the magistrate judge's report. Zea filed a motion for preliminary injunction seeki…
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 Objections cases and more on FLexlaw
MAGISTRATE JUDGE: DENYING MOTION FOR PRELIMINARY INJUNCTION
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Plaintiff Jorge A. Zea's (“Plaintiff”)'s Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Supporting Memorandum of Law to Compel Defendants' Compliance with Their Own Binding Rules (“Motion”) [DE 8]; and the January 14, 2026 Report and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge William Matthewman (the “Report”) [DE 78]. The Court notes that no objections to the Report [DE 78] have been filed, and the time for filing such objections has passed. As no timely objections were filed, the Magistrate Judge's factual findings in the Report [DE 78] are hereby adopted and deemed incorporated into this opinion. LoConte v. Dugger, 847 F. 2d 745, 749-50 (11th Cir. 1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 958 (1988); RTC v. Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F. 2d 1144, 1149 (11th Cir. 1993).
Although no timely objections were filed, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the Report [DE 78] and record and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge's analysis and conclusions.
1
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. The Report [DE 78] is hereby ADOPTED and APPROVED; 2. Plaintiff's Motion for Preliminary Injunction and Supporting Memorandum of Law to Compel Defendants' Compliance with Their Own Binding Rules [DE 8] is hereby DENIED; 3. The Clerk shall email a copy of this order to Plaintiff.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, this 29th day of January, 2026.
/s/ William P. Dimitrouleas WILLIAM P. DIMITROULEAS United States District Judge
Copies furnished to: Counsel of record Magistrate Judge Matthewman
Jorge A. Zea at email: [email protected]
2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- LoCONTE v. Dugger, 847 F.2d 745 (11th Cir. 1988)
- Resolution Tr. Corp. v. Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F.2d 1144 (11th Cir. 1993)
- LoConte v. Dugger, 488 U.S. 958 (U.S. 1988)