Filed: Mar. 13, 2015
Latest Update: Mar. 13, 2015
Summary: ORDER TIMOTHY J. CORRIGAN , District Judge . This case is before the Court on Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand (Doc. 6) and the associated filings (Doc. 9; Doc. 10; Doc. 15). On February 6, 2015, the assigned United States Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 16) recommending that the motion be denied and that Counts I and II of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint be severed and remanded to state court. Plaintiffs objected to the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 20) and De
Summary: ORDER TIMOTHY J. CORRIGAN , District Judge . This case is before the Court on Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand (Doc. 6) and the associated filings (Doc. 9; Doc. 10; Doc. 15). On February 6, 2015, the assigned United States Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 16) recommending that the motion be denied and that Counts I and II of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint be severed and remanded to state court. Plaintiffs objected to the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 20) and Def..
More
ORDER
TIMOTHY J. CORRIGAN, District Judge.
This case is before the Court on Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand (Doc. 6) and the associated filings (Doc. 9; Doc. 10; Doc. 15). On February 6, 2015, the assigned United States Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 16) recommending that the motion be denied and that Counts I and II of Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint be severed and remanded to state court. Plaintiffs objected to the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 20) and Defendant Mick and Associates responded (Doc. 24).1 Plaintiffs filed a Third Amended Complaint (Doc. 22), which provides more detailed allegations against Mick and Associates but does not change the analysis on the remand motion.2 Upon de novo review of the file, and for the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 16), it is hereby
ORDERED:
1. The Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. 16) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.
2. Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand (Doc. 6) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part.
3. The claims against Defendant Neal Smalbach, Counts I and II, are severed and REMANDED to the Fifth Judicial Circuit in and for Marion County, Florida. The Clerk should therefore terminate Smalbach as a party to this case. However, this case should remain open as to the remaining parties.
4. No later than April 3, 2015, Plaintiffs must file a Fourth Amended Complaint addressed only to Defendant Mick and Associates. No later than April 24, 2015, Mick and Associates must respond to the Fourth Amended Complaint.
5. Mick and Associates' motion for extension of time to respond to Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint (Doc. 25) is therefore MOOT.
6. The parties have until April 13, 2015 to file a Case Management Report.
DONE AND ORDERED.