ALICIA FRANK EX REL MURIEL FRANK
v.
BARBARA GINGRANDE AND VITAS HEALTHCARE CORPORATION
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 District Court for the Southern District of Florida adopted a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, denying a petition as moot and dismissing the case. The opinion is a brief order affirming the magistrate's analysis without substantive discussion of the underlying merits.
The petition is denied as moot and the case is dismissed. The court adopted the Magistrate Judge's factual findings and legal conclusions without independent analysis.
“As no timely objections were filed, the Magistrate Judge's factual findings in the Report [DE 5] are hereby adopted and deemed incorporated into this opinion.”
Establishes the court's adoption of the magistrate's findings when no objections are timely filed.
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe opinion does not contain a detailed statement of facts. The court references a Report and Recommendation from Magistrate Judge Hunt but does not s…
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 Petition cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Hunt (the “Report”) [DE 5], issued on November 14, 2025. The Court notes that no objections to the Report [DE 5] have been filed, and the time for filing such objections has passed. As no timely objections were filed, the Magistrate Judge’s factual findings in the Report [DE 5] are hereby adopted and deemed incorporated into this opinion. LoConte v. Dugger, 847 F. 2d 745, 749-50 (11th Cir. 1988), cert. denied, 488 U.S. 958 (1988); RTC v. Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F. 2d 1144, 1149 (11th Cir. 1993).
Although no timely objections were filed, the Court has conducted a de novo review of the Report [DE 5] and record and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s analysis and conclusions.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. The Report [DE 5] is hereby ADOPTED and APPROVED; 2. The Petition is DENIED AS MOOT and the case is DISMISSED;
3. The Clerk shall CLOSE this case.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Lauderdale, Broward County, Florida, this 24th day of November, 2025.
: “4 i} f J ve ea
VILLIAM P. DIMITROULEAS
Copies furnished to: United States District Judge Magistrate Judge Hunt Counsel of record
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Resolution Tr. Corp. v. Hallmark Builders, Inc., 996 F.2d 1144 (11th Cir. 1993)
- LoConte v. Dugger, 488 U.S. 958 (U.S. 1988)