GOODWIN
v.
APOLLO GENERAL 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 District Court for the Southern District of Florida adopted a Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation approving a settlement agreement between Goodwin and Apollo General LLC. With no objections filed by either party, the court approved the settlement and dismissed the case with prejudice.
The court approved the settlement agreement, adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation in its entirety, and dismissed the case with prejudice. The court retained jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the settlement agreement.
[1] A district court must conduct a de novo review of those portions of a magistrate judge's report to which a party has filed specific objections.
[2] A district court reviews portions of a magistrate judge's report for clear error when no objections are filed by any party.
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“In order to challenge the findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge, a party must file written objections which shall specifically identify the portions of the proposed findings and recommendation to which objection is made and the specific basis for objection.”
Establishes the procedural requirement for challenging a magistrate judge's report
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThe parties filed a Joint Motion to Approve Settlement, which was referred to Magistrate Judge Panayotta Augustin-Birch for a report and recommendatio…
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 Clear Error Standard cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS MATTER was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Panayotta Augustin-Birch for a report and recommendation on the parties' Joint Motion to Approve Settlement [ECF No. 13] (“the Motion"). Judge Augustin-Birch has since issued a Report and Recommendation (“the R&R”), recommending that the Court grant Motion and approve the settlement. [ECF No. 21]. Neither party has filed any objections to the R&R and the time to do so has passed. After careful review of the filings, the applicable law, and the record, the Court adopts Judge Augustin-Birch's R&R in its entirety.
“In order to challenge the findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge, a party must file written objections which shall specifically identify the portions of the proposed findings and recommendation to which objection is made and the specific basis for objection.” Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App'x 781, 783 (11th Cir. 2006) (cleaned up). The objections must also present “supporting legal authority.”S.D. Fla. L. Mag. J.R. 4(b). Once a district court receives “objections meeting the specificity requirement set out above,” it must “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report to which objection is made and may accept, reject, or modify in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” Macort, 208 F. App’x at 783–84 (cleaned up). To
the extent a party fails to object to parts of the magistrate judge's report, those portions are reviewed for clear error. Id. at 784 (cleaned up).
The parties have not submitted any objections to the R&R, and the time to do so has passed. As such, the Court has reviewed the R&R for clear error only. Upon this review, the Court finds not only no clear error but also notes that Judge Augustin-Birch's report is thorough, cogent, and compelling. The Court adopts the report and recommendation in its entirety and grants the Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement.
Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED:
1. Magistrate Judge Augustin-Birch's R&R [ECF No. 21] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED.
2. The parties' Joint Motion to Approve Settlement [ECF No. 13] is GRANTED. The Settlement Agreement [ECF No. 13-1] is APPROVED. This Court retains jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the Settlement Agreement.
3. This matter is DISMISSED with prejudice.
4. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case.
DONE AND ORDERED in the Southern District of Florida on June 4, 2025.
cc: counsel of record
DAVID S. LEIBOWITZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
2