HAVA
v.
CITY OF HOLLYWOOD
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 affirmed a magistrate judge's recommendation awarding defendant officer Kyle Otwell $20,034 in attorney's fees. The court conducted de novo review of the legal conclusions and adopted the magistrate judge's findings.
Defendant Officer Kyle Otwell is entitled to attorney's fees in the amount of $20,034. The magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation was affirmed and adopted.
“Legal conclusions are reviewed de novo, even in the absence of an objection.”
Establishes the standard of review applied by the district court when no objections are filed to a magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation
Previewing 1 of 2 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceDefendant Officer Kyle Otwell filed a motion for attorney's fees. A magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation on January 28, 2025, recommend…
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 Legal Conclusions cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS MATTER has come before the Court upon the Defendant Officer Kyle Otwell's Motion for Attorney's Fees and Memorandum of Law (DE [49]) (“Motion”), which was referred to the magistrate judge for Report and Recommendation. The magistrate judge issued a Report and Recommendation (DE [56]) on January 28, 2025, recommending that Defendant Otwell be awarded $20,034 in attorney's fees. No objections to the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation having been filed.
With no objections filed, the Court's review of the Report and Recommendation (DE [49]) is properly limited to a de novo review of only its legal conclusions. See Certain Underwriters at Lloyd's of London v. PharmaTech, LLC, 2019 WL 4673739, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 19, 2019) (“Legal conclusions are reviewed de novo, even in the absence of an objection."). This Court has reviewed the entire file and record and has made a de novo review of the issues.
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation (DE [56]) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. The Motion (DE [49]) is
GRANTED IN PART, and Defendant Otwell should be awarded $20,034 in attorney's fees.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 12th day of February 2025.
RAAG SINGHAL UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies furnished counsel via CM/ECF
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Cited By
-
Hava v. City of Hollywood (S.D. Fla. 2025)…ion having been filed. With no objections filed, the Court’s review of the Report and Recommendation (DE [49]) is properly limited to a de novo review of only its legal conclusions. See Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London v. PharmaTech, LLC, 2019 WL 4673739, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 19, 2019) (“Legal conclusions are reviewed de novo, even in the absence of an objection.”). This Court has reviewed the entire file and record and has made a de novo review of the issues. ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the mag…
-
Ctr. Way Co. Ltd. v. Individuals (S.D. Fla. 2023)…d any such objections. With no objections filed, the Court’s review of the Report and Recommendation (DE [49]) is properly limited to a de novo review of only its legal conclusions. See Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London v. PharmaTech, LLC, 2019 WL 4673739, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 19, 2019) (“Legal conclusions are reviewed de novo, even in the absence of an objection.”). This Court has reviewed the entire file and record and has made a de novo review of the issues. No objections to the Report and Reco…
-
Stone v. Hallandale Police Dep't (S.D. Fla. 2020)….D. Fla. Mag. R. 4(b). Here, neither side filed any such objections. Therefore, the Court’s review of the R&R is properly limited to a de novo review of only its legal conclusions. See Certain Underwriters at Lloyd’s of London v. PharmaTech, LLC, 2019 WL 4673739, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Aug. 19, 2019) (“Legal conclusions are reviewed de novo, even in the absence of an objection.”). The Court has reviewed the R&R, the entire file, and the record. In so doing, the Court has concluded a de novo review of Magistrate…
Authorities Cited
- Hava v. City of Hollywood (S.D. Fla. 2025)