PIERRE-LOUIS
v.
SP PLUS CORPORATION
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 Court affirmed and adopted the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, granting Plaintiffs' motion for attorneys' fees in part and denying their request for non-taxable costs and sanctions.
Plaintiffs sought attorneys' fees and costs, and sanctions against Defendants. The Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation, recommending a…
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 upon United States Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Becerra’s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 316] (“Report”), filed on August 4, 2021. The Report recommends that the Court grant in part and deny in part Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs [ECF No. 267]. See Report at 1. Specifically, the Report recommends that Plaintiffs be awarded a total of $140,683.08 in attorneys’ fees, and that their request for nontaxable costs be denied in its entirety. Id.
Additionally, the Report recommends that Plaintiffs’ request that sanctions be imposed against Defendants be denied and that Defendants’ Motion for Sanctions [ECF No. 284] be denied as well. Id. The Report properly notified the parties of their right to object to Magistrate Judge Becerra’s findings. Id. at 62.
Plaintiffs timely filed Objections to the Report [ECF No. 317] (“Objections”) on August 18, 2021. The Court being fully advised in the premises, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Report [ECF No. 316] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED as explained herein.
LEGAL STANDARD
This Court reviews de novo the determination of any disputed portions of the Magistrate Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006).
A proper objection “identifie[s] specific findings set forth in the [Report] and articulate[s] a legal ground for objection.” Leatherwood v. Anna’s Linens Co., 384 F. App’x 853, 857 (11th Cir. 2010) (alterations and emphasis added; citations omitted).
ANALYSIS
Upon due consideration of the record, including Judge Becerra’s Report and Plaintiffs’ Objections thereto, the Court overrules the Objections and adopts the Report. The Objections dispute the way in which Judge Becerra used her discretion to analyze several issues—but do not provide a basis for rejecting the Report. The Court finds that Judge Becerra’s 63-page Report
thoughtfully addresses the issues briefed by the parties. Ultimately, after reviewing the Report, the Objections, and the pertinent portions of the record, the Court, in the exercise of its discretion, agrees with and adopts Judge Becerra’s detailed and well-reasoned findings of fact and conclusions of law.
CONCLUSION
For the foregoing reasons, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. Plaintiffs’ Objections [ECF No. 317] are OVERRULED. 2. The Report [ECF No. 316] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED. 3. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Attorneys’ Fees and Costs [ECF No. 267] is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART. Plaintiffs are hereby awarded a total of $140,683.08, but no
additional costs. Plaintiffs shall prepare and submit to the Court a proposed Final Judgment awarding taxable costs after conferring with Defendants. 4. Further, Plaintiffs’ request that sanctions be imposed against Defendants is
DENIED.
5. Finally, Defendants’ Motion for Sanctions [ECF No. 284] is similarly DENIED. DONE AND ORDERED in Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 20th day of August, 2021.
ln A. RUIZ II