ORTIZ MILLS
v.
KEYS CLAIMS CONSULTANTS, LLC
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.
The court adopted the magistrate judge's report and recommendation, approving the settlement agreement and dismissing the case with prejudice.
The parties filed a joint motion to approve a settlement agreement and dismiss the case. The magistrate judge recommended granting the motion. The par…
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 Settlement Agreement Approval cases and more on FLexlaw
This matter is before the Court on consideration of the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. #11), filed November 27, 2019, recommending that the Joint Motion to Approve Settlement Agreement and to Dismiss With Prejudice (Doc. #10) be granted, the Settlement Agreement (Doc. #10-1) be approved, and that the case be dismissed. On December 2, 2019, the parties filed a Joint Notice of Non-Opposition to Report and Recommendation (Doc. #14) in response to the Magistrate Judge’s Text Order (Doc. 13) directing that any payment due under the proposed settlement need not be made until 3 business days after the entry of this Opinion and Order. 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), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983). 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 recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The district judge reviews 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); Castro Bobadilla v. Reno, 826 F. Supp. 1428, 1431-32 (S.D. Fla. 1993), aff’d, 28 F. 3d 116 (11th Cir. 1994) (Table). After conducting an independent examination of the file and upon due consideration of the Report and Recommendation, the Court accepts the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge. Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED: 1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. #11) is hereby adopted and the findings incorporated herein.
2. The parties' Joint Motion to Approve Settlement
Agreement and to Dismiss With Prejudice (Doc. #10) is granted and the Settlement Agreement (Doc. #10-1) is approved as a fair and reasonable resolution of a bona fide dispute. 3. The Clerk shall enter judgment dismissing the case with prejudice, terminate all deadlines and motions, and close the file. DONE and ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, this 3rd day of December, 2019.
—" Ap p
JGHH E. STEELE
Sq IGOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Copies: Hon. Mac R. McCoy United States Magistrate Judge Counsel of Record Unrepresented parties
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776 (11th Cir. 1993)
- Williams v. Louie L. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982)
- Castro Bobadilla v. Reno, 1993 WL 259424 (S.D. Fla. 1993)
- Williams v. Wainwright, 459 U.S. 1112 (U.S. 1983)