HARRIS v. NATIONSTAR MORTGAGE, LLC, 8:13-CIV-2610-T-EAK-EAJ. (2014)
Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
Number: infdco20140515990
Visitors: 21
Filed: May 14, 2014
Latest Update: May 14, 2014
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ELIZABETH A. KOVACHEVICH, Magistrate Judge. This cause is before the Court on the report and recommendation (R&R) issued by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth A. Jenkins on April 23, 2014 (Doc. 28). The magistrate judge recommended that the motion to strike affirmative defenses (Doc. 19) be denied. STANDARD OF REVIEW When a party makes a timely and specific objection to a finding of fact in the report and recommendation, the district court should make a de
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION ELIZABETH A. KOVACHEVICH, Magistrate Judge. This cause is before the Court on the report and recommendation (R&R) issued by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth A. Jenkins on April 23, 2014 (Doc. 28). The magistrate judge recommended that the motion to strike affirmative defenses (Doc. 19) be denied. STANDARD OF REVIEW When a party makes a timely and specific objection to a finding of fact in the report and recommendation, the district court should make a de ..
More
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
ELIZABETH A. KOVACHEVICH, Magistrate Judge.
This cause is before the Court on the report and recommendation (R&R) issued by Magistrate Judge Elizabeth A. Jenkins on April 23, 2014 (Doc. 28). The magistrate judge recommended that the motion to strike affirmative defenses (Doc. 19) be denied.
STANDARD OF REVIEW
When a party makes a timely and specific objection to a finding of fact in the report and recommendation, the district court should make a de novo review of the record with respect to that factual issue. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); U.S. v. Raddatz, 447 U.S. 667 (1980); Jeffrey S. v. State Board of Education of State of Georgia, 896 f.2d 507 (11th Cir. 1990). However, when no timely and specific objections are filed, case law indicates that the court should review the findings using a clearly erroneous standard. Gropp v. United Airlines, Inc., 817 F.Supp. 1558, 1562 (M.D. Fla. 1993). No timely objections have been filed.
The Court has reviewed the report and recommendation and made an independent review of the record. Upon due consideration, the Court concurs with the report and recommendation. Accordingly, it is
ORDERED that the report and recommendation (Doc. 28) be adopted and incorporated by reference; the motion to strike (Doc. 28) be denied.
DONE and ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
