ICON EV LLC
v.
CORPLE
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.
ICON EV LLC obtained a default judgment against Steve Corple for $126,104.00 plus prejudgment interest after the defendant failed to respond to the plaintiff's second motion for default judgment. The district court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation to grant the motion without objection from either party.
The district court adopted the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation and granted the plaintiff's second motion for default judgment as to Count I, entering judgment in favor of ICON EV LLC in the amount of $126,104.00 plus prejudgment interest of $16,285.05 against defendant Steve Corple.
[1] A district court must conduct a de novo review of a magistrate judge's legal conclusions, even in the absence of an objection.
[2] A district court must conduct a de novo review of a magistrate judge's factual findings when a party files a timely and specific objection.
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“After conducting a review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation.”
Establishes the standard of review for magistrate judge recommendations under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceICON EV LLC filed suit against Steve Corple, individually and doing business as Corple Corral Golf Carts. The defendant failed to timely respond to th…
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 Default Judgment cases and more on FLexlaw
The United States Magistrate Judge recommends granting the plaintiff's second motion for default judgment (Doc. 21). The deadline to object to the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation has passed without either party lodging an objection. Considering the record, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation.
After conducting a review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). If a party files a timely and specific objection to a finding of fact by a magistrate judge, the district court must conduct a de novo review with respect to that factual issue. Stokes v. Singletary, 952 F. 2d 1567, 1576 (11th Cir. 1992). The district court reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F. 3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Ashworth v. Glades Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs, 379 F. Supp. 3d 1244, 1246 (M.D. Fla. 2019).
1
In the absence of any objection and after reviewing the factual allegations and legal conclusions, I adopt the Report and Recommendation.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED:
1. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 21) is ADOPTED and made a part of this Order for all purposes.
2. The Plaintiff's second motion for default judgment as to Count I (Doc. 17) is GRANTED.
3. The Plaintiff's motion for default judgment as to Counts I and II are DENIED without prejudice as moot.
4. The Clerk is directed to ENTER JUDGMENT which shall read
"Judgment is entered in favor of Plaintiff ICON EV LCC and against Defendant Steve Corple in the amount of $126,104.00, plus prejudgment interest of $16,285.05."
5. The Clerk is directed to CLOSE this case and TERMINATE any remaining deadlines.
ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on December 30, 2024.
Kathryn Kimball Mizelle United States District Judge
2