SHOR
v.
STORM TIGHT WINDOWS INC.

S.D. Fla. | 2022-01-12
No. 19-62784-CIV
District Court, S.D. Florida (2022)

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.


Holding

The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations, granting in part and denying in part the Bill of Costs and Motion for Attorneys' Fees.


Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff filed a Bill of Costs and a Motion for Attorneys' Fees. These were referred to a Magistrate Judge who issued a Report and Recommendations. N…

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.


Opinion of the Court

________________________________/ ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS [ECF No. 62]

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Report (“R&R”) of Magistrate Judge Patrick M. Hunt recommending that both the Bill of Costs and Motion for Attorneys’ Fees [ECF Nos. 52 and 58] be granted in part and denied in part [ECF No. 62].

On April 19, 2021, the Court referred the Bill of Costs and Motion for Attorneys’ Fees to Magistrate Judge Patrick M. Hunt for a Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 53].

On December 21, 2021, Judge Hunt issued the instant R&R recommending that both the Bill of Costs and Motion for Attorneys’ Fees be granted in part and denied in part [ECF No. 62]. The R&R states that the parties shall file any objections within fourteen days of the date of service of the R&R [ECF No. 62 p. 10]. No party has filed objections. The Court has conducted a de novo review of the R&R and the record in this case and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. See Williams v. McNeil, 557 F. 3d 1287, 1291 (11th Cir. 2009) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)). Upon review, the Court finds the R&R to be well reasoned and correct. The Court therefore agrees with the analysis in the R&R and concludes that the Bill CASE NO. 19-62784-CIV-CANNON/Hunt

of Costs and Motion for Attorneys’ Fees [ECF Nos. 52 and 58] should be GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART for the reasons set forth therein. Accordingly, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows: 1. The R&R [ECF No. 62] is ADOPTED. 2. Plaintiff's Bill of Costs [ECF Nos. 52] is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED

IN PART.

3. Plaintiff's Motion for Attorneys’ Fees [ECF Nos. 58] is GRANTED IN PART

AND DENIED IN PART.

4. Plaintiff shall recover attorneys’ fees of $11,137.50 and costs of $465, for a total award of $11,602.50

5. The Clerk of Court shall CLOSE this case.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Pierce, Florida this 12th day of January 2022.

AILEEN M. CANNON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ce: counsel of record


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw