TURNER
v.
ROCKET MORTGAGE, 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.
Turner v. Rocket Mortgage is a post-judgment cost-taxing order in which the district court adopted a magistrate judge's recommendation, granting in part and denying in part defendants' motion for attorneys' fees and cost taxation. The court denied the motion for attorneys' fees but granted defendants' motions to tax specific costs totaling approximately $450.40.
The court adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation, denying defendants' motion for attorneys' fees but granting their motions to tax costs of $402.00 for removal and $24.20 each for printing the settlement conference transcript.
“Upon review, the Court finds Chief Magistrate Judge Torres' R&R to be well reasoned and correct.”
Establishes the district court's adoption of the magistrate judge's analysis and conclusions
Previewing 1 of 3 key quotes on this case — the court’s exact language, pinpointed for members.
Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligenceThis is a civil case (No. 22-cv-23028) involving Turner as plaintiff and Rocket Mortgage, LLC and Amrock, LLC as defendants. The parties had participa…
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.
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendants Rocket Mortgage, LLC and Amrock, LLC's Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs, ECF No. [165]. The Court previously referred the Motion to Chief Magistrate Judge Edwin G. Torres for a Report and Recommendations. See ECF No. [168]. On April 19, 2024, Chief Magistrate Judge Torres issued a Report and Recommendation, ECF No. [175] (“R&R”), recommending that Defendants' Motion be granted in part and denied in part. The R&R advised the parties that objections to the R&R must be filed within fourteen (14) days of the R&R. ECF No. [175] at 11. To date, neither party has filed objections nor sought additional time to file objections. The Court has, nonetheless, conducted a de novo review of the R&R and the record and is otherwise fully advised in the premises. See Williams v. McNeil, 557 F. 3d 1287, 1291 (11th Cir. 2009) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)).
Upon review, the Court finds Chief Magistrate Judge Torres' R&R to be well reasoned and correct. The Court agrees with the analysis in the R&R and concludes that for the reasons set forth therein, Defendants' Motion is granted in part and denied in part.
For the foregoing reasons, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
Case No. 22-cv-23028-BLOOM/Otazo-Reyes
1. The R&R, ECF No. [175], is ADOPTED;
2. The Defendants' Motion, ECF No. [165], is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part as follows:
a. Defendants' Motion for Attorneys' Fees is DENIED;
b. Defendant Rocket Mortgage, LLC's Motion to Tax Costs of $402.00 for the cost of removing this action is GRANTED;
c. Defendant, Rocket Mortgage, LLC's Motion to Tax Costs of $24.20 for the cost of printing the transcript of the parties' May 18, 2023 settlement conference is GRANTED; and
d.. Defendant, Amrock, LLC's Motion to Tax Costs of $24.20 for the cost of printing the transcript of the parties' May 18, 2023 settlement conference is GRANTED;
3. All pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT; and
4. The Clerk shall CLOSE this case.
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, on June 6, 2024.
BETH BLOOM UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies to:
Counsel of Record
Mark A. Turner 1411 SE 26th Avenue Homestead, FL 33035 PRO SE