LANIER
v.
CITY OF MIAMI
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 adopts the Magistrate Judge's recommendation to grant in part the defendant's motion for costs, awarding $374.00.
The defendant, City of Miami, prevailed in a civil action against the plaintiff, Brandon Lanier. The defendant filed a motion for costs, which was ref…
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 Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 cases and more on FLexlaw
Civil Action No. 23-22510-Civ-Scola
Order Adopting Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation on Defendant's Unopposed Motion for Costs
The Court granted Defendant City of Miami's motion to dismiss and entered judgment in favor of the Defendant. (ECF Nos. 56, 68.) The Defendant subsequently filed an unopposed motion for costs seeking reimbursement for $644.00 in costs as the prevailing party in this case. (ECF No. 69.) The Court referred the motion to United States Magistrate Judge Lauren F. Louis for a report and recommendations, consistent with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72, and Rule 1(d) of the Local Magistrate Judge Rules. (ECF No. 70.)
On November 25, 2024, Judge Louis issued a report, recommending that the Court grant in part the Defendant's motion. (Rep. & Rec. 3-4, ECF No. 77.) Specifically, Judge Louis recommended reducing the costs award from $644.00 to $374.00 because the supporting invoices Defendant presented for service of subpoenas “do not specify the number of hours expended by the process server or the number of service attempts made,” and “Defendant does not explain why rush fees were paid on two occasions.” (Id. at 3.) Neither party objected to the report and recommendations.
A district court judge must conduct a de novo review of only “those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636. Where no objections are made, a report may be adopted in full without conducting a de novo review, provided no plain error exists. See id.; Menendez v. Naples Cmty. Hosp. Inc., No. 2:20-CV- 898-SPC-MRM, 2021 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 215317, 2021 WL 5178496, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Nov. 8, 2021) (collecting cases).
The Court has considered Judge Louis's report, the record, and the relevant legal authorities. The Court finds Judge Louis's report and recommendations cogent and compelling. The Court affirms and adopts Judge Louis's report and recommendations (ECF No. 77), and the Court grants in part Defendant's unopposed motion for costs. (ECF No. 69.) An award of taxable costs is entered in favor of Defendant City of Miami, and against Plaintiff Brandon Lanier, in the amount of $374.00.
Done and ordered in Miami, Florida, on December 10, 2024.
Robert N. Scola, Jr. United States District Judge
Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus
Citator
Authorities Cited
- Bueno v. Univ. Of Miami (S.D. Fla. 2023)
- Farrat v. Kijakazi (S.D. Fla. 2024)