HARRY PERSAUD
v.
BANK OF NEW YORK MELLON, AND/OR ITS SUCCESSORS, INDIVIDUALLY, AND IN THEIR OFFICIAL CAPACITY, AN ENS LEGIS BEING USED TO CONCEAL FRAUD
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.
In this federal civil case, the District Court adopted a Magistrate Judge's recommendation and granted a motion to dismiss all counts of Plaintiff Persaud's amended complaint against Bank of New York Mellon. Count III was dismissed with prejudice, while the remaining counts were dismissed without leave to amend.
The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's recommendations: Count III was dismissed with prejudice and the remaining counts were dismissed without leave to amend. The defendant's motion to dismiss was granted in part.
[1] A court reviews a magistrate judge's legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of objections.
[2] A court may adopt a magistrate judge's report and recommendation and make it part of its order.
Previewing 2 of 5 headnotes on this case. FLexlaw’s editorially structured points of law — every proposition, pinpointed — are reserved for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence“this Court reviews the Magistrate Judge's legal conclusions de novo”
Establishes the standard of review the district court applies to the magistrate judge's recommendations
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligencePlaintiff Harry Persaud filed an amended complaint against Bank of New York Mellon and/or its successors in their individual and official capacities, …
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 cases and more on FLexlaw
Defendant moves to dismiss (doc. # 23) Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (doc. # 19) on all counts with prejudice. The Magistrate Judge recommended dismissal of Count III of the Amended Complaint with prejudice and dismissal of the remainder of the Amended Complaint without leave to amend. (Doc. # 30).
The deadline for objections has passed. No party objected to the Magistrate Judge's recommendations. Still, this Court reviews the Magistrate Judge's legal conclusions de novo. See Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F. 3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994). Upon de novo review, Count III of the Amended Complaint is due to be dismissed with prejudice and the remainder of the Amended Complaint is due to be dismissed without leave to amend, for the reasons the Magistrate Judge stated.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED and ADJUDGED that:
1. The Report and Recommendation (doc. # 30) is ADOPTED and made part of this Order;
2. Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (doc. # 23) is GRANTED in part;
3. Count III of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (doc. # 19) is DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE;
4. The remainder of Plaintiff's Amended Complaint (doc. # 19) is DISMISSED WITHOUT LEAVE TO AMEND; and
5. The Clerk is directed to terminate any pending motions and CLOSE this case.
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers in Orlando, Florida, on December 10, 2025.