WALSH
v.
ANDREWS FLORIST ON 4TH STREET INC.

M.D. Fla. | 2022-12-28
No. 8:21-cv-2696
District Court, M.D. Florida (2022)

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.


Holding

The court denied the Secretary of Labor's motion for default judgment and dismissed the complaint without prejudice, allowing the Secretary to amend the complaint.


Facts & Procedural History

The Secretary of Labor moved for default judgment against the defendants. The Magistrate Judge recommended denying the motion, finding the Secretary h…

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.


Opinion of the Court

This matter is before the Court on consideration of United States Magistrate Judge Christopher P. Tuite’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 19), filed on December 9, 2022, recommending that Secretary Martin J. Walsh’s Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. # 17) be denied. As of the date of this Order, no objections have been filed and the time for filing objections has lapsed. The Court accepts and adopts the Report and Recommendation, and denies the Secretary’s Motion as set forth herein. Discussion After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject or modify the magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F. 2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982).

In the absence of specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review factual findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F. 2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993), and the court may accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C).

The district judge 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); Castro Bobadilla v. Reno, 826 F. Supp. 1428, 1431-32 (S.D. Fla. 1993), aff’d, 28 F. 3d 116 (11th Cir. 1994). After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings, conclusions and recommendations, and giving de novo review to matters of law, the Court accepts the factual findings and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge. The Secretary has not adequately alleged that the employee was covered by the FLSA through either individual or enterprise coverage. (Doc. # 19 at 5-10). The Court will allow the Secretary to amend the complaint to address this deficiency.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED: (1) The Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 19) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. (2) The Secretary’s Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. # 17) is DENIED. (3) The Secretary’s Complaint (Doc. # 1) is DISMISSED without prejudice. (4) The Secretary may file an amended complaint within 30 days of the date of this Order. DONE and ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Florida, this 28th day of December, 2022.

VIRGINIA M. HERNANDEZ’COVINGTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw