DORAL CLUB, LLC
v.
INDIAN HARBOR INSURANCE COMPANY
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.
Doral Club, LLC v. Indian Harbor Insurance Company concerns a post-judgment motion for costs and attorney's fees. The district court adopted a magistrate judge's recommendation and granted the defendant's motion in part, awarding $24,293.00 in costs and fees.
The district court granted the defendant's motion in part, awarding $170.00 in non-taxable costs and $24,123.00 in attorney's fees, for a total of $24,293.00.
[1] A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge's report and recommendation.
[2] Portions of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation to which no specific objections are made are reviewed by the district court only for clear error.
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“A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).”
Establishes the standard of review for magistrate judge reports and recommendations
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceFollowing judgment in this case, Defendant Indian Harbor Insurance Company filed an Amended Motion for Entitlement to an Award of Costs and Attorney's…
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 Magistrate Judge'S Report And Recommendation Review cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Defendant's Amended Motion for Entitlement to an Award of Costs and Attorney's Fees Pursuant to Rule 54, 68, Florida Statute 768.79 and Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442 (the “Motion”). [ECF No. 77]. The action was referred to Magistrate Judge Edwin Torres for all post-judgment matters. [ECF No. 72]. On February 3, 2025, Judge Torres issued his report recommending that the Motion be granted in part (the “Report”). [ECF No. 81]. No party has objected to the Report.¹
A district court may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Those portions of the report and recommendation to which objection is made are accorded de novo review, if those objections “pinpoint the specific findings that the party disagrees with.” United States v. Schultz, 565 F. 3d 1353, 1360 (11th Cir. 2009); see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). Any portions of the report and recommendation to which no specific objection is made are reviewed only for clear error. Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. WestPoint 1 On March 12, 2025, Defendant filed a "Request to Adopt Magistrate Torres' Ruling Dated February 3, 2025 on Defendant's Amended Motion for Entitlement." [ECF No. 82].
Underwriters, L.L.C., 199 F. Supp. 2d 1271, 1276 (M.D. Fla. 2001); accord Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App'x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006).
The Court has reviewed the Report for clear error and agrees with Judge Torres's wellreasoned findings and conclusion that the Motion should be granted in part.
CONCLUSION
Accordingly, after careful consideration, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
(1) Judge Torres's Report and Recommendation, [ECF No. 81], is ADOPTED in full;
(2) Defendant's Amended Motion for Entitlement to an Award of Costs and Attorney's Fees Pursuant to Rule 54, 68, Florida Statute 768.79 and Florida Rule of Civil Procedure 1.442, [ECF No. 77], is GRANTED in part;
(3) Defendant Indian Harbor Insurance Company is awarded $170.00 for non-taxable costs and $24,123.00 in attorneys' fees, for a total sum of $24,293.00, for which sum let execution issue; and (4) Defendant's Request to Adopt Magistrate Torres' Ruling Dated February 3, 2025 on Defendant's Amended Motion for Entitlement is GRANTED.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 10th day of April, 2025.
DARRIN P. GAYLES
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- United States v. Schultz, 565 F.3d 1353 (11th Cir. 2009)
- Liberty Am. Ins. Grp., Inc. v. Westpoint Underwriters, L.L.C., 2001 WL 1850837 (M.D. Fla. 2001)