BATTLE v. AMERICAN HOME MORTGAGE SERVICING INC., 2:15-cv-563-FtM-38CM. (2016)
Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
Number: infdco20161207996
Visitors: 8
Filed: Dec. 05, 2016
Latest Update: Dec. 05, 2016
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on United States Magistrate Judge Carol Mirando's Report and Recommendation (Doc. #67) filed on September 6, 2016. Judge Mirando recommends that Plaintiffs, Bernice Battle and Willie Battle's Opposed Third Motion for Leave to Add Additional Counts to the Second Amended Complaint (Doc. #60) be denied. No objections were filed, 2 and the time to do so has now expired. A district judge "may accept, reject,
Summary: ORDER 1 SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL , District Judge . This matter comes before the Court on United States Magistrate Judge Carol Mirando's Report and Recommendation (Doc. #67) filed on September 6, 2016. Judge Mirando recommends that Plaintiffs, Bernice Battle and Willie Battle's Opposed Third Motion for Leave to Add Additional Counts to the Second Amended Complaint (Doc. #60) be denied. No objections were filed, 2 and the time to do so has now expired. A district judge "may accept, reject, ..
More
ORDER1
SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL, District Judge.
This matter comes before the Court on United States Magistrate Judge Carol Mirando's Report and Recommendation (Doc. #67) filed on September 6, 2016. Judge Mirando recommends that Plaintiffs, Bernice Battle and Willie Battle's Opposed Third Motion for Leave to Add Additional Counts to the Second Amended Complaint (Doc. #60) be denied. No objections were filed,2 and the time to do so has now expired.
A district judge "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). If no specific objections to findings of fact are filed, the district judge is not required to conduct a de novo review of those findings. See Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993). However, the district judge must review legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994)
After careful consideration and an independent review of the file, the Court accepts, adopts, and approves the Report and Recommendation.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
1. United States Magistrate Judge Carol Mirando's Report and Recommendation (Doc. #Doc. #67) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED.
2. Plaintiffs' Opposed Third Amended Motion for Leave to Add Additional Counts to the Second Amended Complaint is DENIED.
3. Plaintiffs' Third Amended Complaint is accepted as filed.
FootNotes
1. Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or websites. These hyperlinks are provided only for users' convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other websites, this Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their websites. Likewise, the Court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their websites. The Court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the Court.
2. Prior to the entry of this Order, Plaintiffs' filed their Third Amended Complaint (Doc. #68), which incorporated the findings of the Report and Recommendation (Doc. #67) by only including two counts — negligence and fraud.
Source: Leagle
