BOWEN
v.
SHORE EXCURSION GROUP, LLC
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.
Plaintiff Bowen sought a default judgment against Shore Excursion Group, LLC for damages after the defendant failed to respond to the complaint. The district court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation and granted the motion for default judgment, awarding $194,867.10 in damages.
The court granted Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment and awarded $194,867.10 in damages after finding the defendant in default.
“As no timely objections were filed, the Magistrate Judge's factual findings in the Report are hereby adopted and deemed incorporated into this opinion.”
Establishes that the magistrate judge's findings are accepted as the basis for the court's decision when no objections are timely filed.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff filed a motion for default judgment on May 20, 2024. A magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation on September 24, 2024. No timely …
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 Default Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon Plaintiff’s Motion for Default Judgment filed May 20, 2024 [DE 90] and the September 24, 2024 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Panayotta D. Augustin-Birch (the “Report”) [DE 105]. The Court notes that no objections to the Report [DE 105] 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 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 and record and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s analysis and conclusions.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. The Report [DE 105] is hereby ADOPTED and APPROVED; 2. Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment as to damages [DE 90] is hereby
GRANTED.
3. Plaintiff is awarded $194,867.10. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, this 15th day of October 2024.
“I if i f — fi vo ve g 4 ay 4 if tz “3 iA aan AWMetife<
VILLIAM P. DIMITROULEAS
United States District Judge Copies to: Counsel of record
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- LoCONTE v. Dugger, 847 F.2d 745 (11th Cir. 1988)
- LoConte v. Dugger, 488 U.S. 958 (U.S. 1988)