BLUEGREEN VACATIONS UNLIMITED, INC.
v.
TIMESHARE LAWYERS, P.A.
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 District Court adopted a Magistrate Judge's report and recommendation awarding Bluegreen Vacations Unlimited $50,145.02 in taxable costs against defendants, granting in part the plaintiffs' motion for costs initially requested at $60,369.02.
The Court awarded plaintiffs $50,145.02 in taxable costs total, comprised of $400.00 for filing fee, $1,040.00 for service of process, $48,665.02 in transcript costs, and $40.00 in witness fees, granting in part and denying in part the motion.
[1] A party must file written objections that specifically identify the portions of a magistrate judge's report and recommendation to which objection is made and the specific…
[2] Objections to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation must present supporting legal authority.
Previewing 2 of 6 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 judge must conduct a de novo review of only 'those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.'”
Establishes the standard of review when no objections are filed to a magistrate judge's report.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiffs Bluegreen Vacations Unlimited and Bluegreen Vacations Corporation sought an award of taxable costs against defendants Pandora Marketing, LL…
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 Taxable Costs cases and more on FLexlaw
Timeshare Lawyers P.A., and others, Defendants. Civil Action No. 20-24681-Civ-Scola
Order Adopting Magistrate Judge's Report And Recommendation
This cause comes before the Court on the Plaintiffs' motion for award of taxable costs against Defendants Pandora Marketing, LLC, Rich Folk, and William Wilson. (Pl.'s Mot., ECF No. 564.) The motion was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman for a report and recommendations. (Court's Ref., ECF No. 565.) The Defendants responded opposing the motion (ECF No. 569), and the Plaintiffs replied. (ECF No. 570.) The Plaintiffs originally requested $72,251.70 in costs (ECF No. 564) but revised their request to $60,369.02 after reviewing the Defendants' response in opposition. (ECF No. 570.) The Plaintiffs requested $60,369.02 for the following costs: $400.00 for the filing fee; $1,040.00 for service of process; $58,680.82 in transcript costs; and $118.20 for witness fees. (Id.) Judge Goodman issued a report recommending the Court grant in part and deny in part the Plaintiffs' motion. (ECF No. 591.) Specifically, Judge Goodman recommended the Court award the Plaintiffs $10,224.00 less than the requested amount: “$50,145.02 in taxable costs ($400.00 for the filing fee; $1,040.00 for service of process; $48,665.02 in transcript costs; and $40.00 for witness fees).” (Id. at 21.) Neither the Plaintiffs nor the Defendants filed objections to Judge Goodman's report and recommendations, and the time to do so has passed.
A district court judge must conduct a de novo review of only “those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636. Where no objections are made, a report may be adopted in full without conducting a de novo review, provided no plain error exists. See id.; Menendez v. Naples Cmty. Hosp. Inc., No. 2:20-CV- 898-SPC-MRM, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 215317, 2021 WL 5178496, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 8, 2021) (collecting cases).
The Court has considered Judge Goodman's report, the record, and the relevant legal authorities. The Court finds Judge Goodman's report and recommendations cogent and compelling. The Court affirms and adopts Judge Goodman's report and recommendations. (ECF No. 591.) Accordingly, the Court grants in part and denies in part the Plaintiffs' motion, awarding the Plaintiffs $50,145.02 in taxable costs total, comprised of $400.00 for the filing fee; $1,040.00 for service of process; $48,665.02 in transcript costs; and $40.00 for witness fees. (ECF No. 564.)
Done and ordered in Miami, Florida, on May 28, 2024.
Robert N. Scola, Jr. United States District Judge
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Bueno v. Univ. Of Miami (S.D. Fla. 2023)
- Farrat v. Kijakazi (S.D. Fla. 2024)