AMERICAN MARINE TECH., INC.
v.
WORLD GROUP YACHTING, INC.
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 adopted the magistrate judge's recommendation to grant in part and deny in part the motion to tax costs, and granted motions for attorneys' fees and interest.
Plaintiff moved to tax costs and for attorneys' fees, pre and post-judgment interest, and appellate attorneys' fees. The magistrate judge recommended …
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 Appellate Attorney'S Fees cases and more on FLexlaw
THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation to District Judge (DE ) issued on September 9, 2022. Therein, Magistrate Judge Valle considered Plaintiff’s Motion to Tax Costs (DE ), Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees, Pre and Post-Judgment Interest (DE ), and Plaintiff’s Motions for Appellate Attorneys’ Fees (DE ) and (DE ).
Magistrate Judge Valle recommends the Motion to Tax Costs (DE ) be granted in part and denied in part, the Motion for Attorneys’ Fees, Pre and Post-Judgment Interest (DE ) be granted, and the Motions for Appellate Attorneys’ Fees (DE ) and (DE ) be granted. The parties were given seven days to file any objections to the magistrate judge’s factual findings and recommendation. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); S.D. Fla. Mag.
J. R. 4(b). Here, neither side filed any such objections. With no objections filed, the Court’s review of the Report and Recommendation (DE ) 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 Recommendation (DE ) have been filed, thus, the Court reviews it for clear error. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation to District Judge (DE ) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED as follows: 1. Plaintiff’s Motion to Tax Costs (DE ) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED
IN PART. Plaintiff American Marine Tech., Inc. is AWARDED costs in the amount of $11,396.41 against Defendants, jointly and severally. 2. Plaintiff’s Motion for Attorneys’ Fees, Pre and Post-Judgment Interest (DE ) is GRANTED. a. Plaintiff American Marine Tech., Inc. is AWARDED attorneys’ fees in the amount of $130,243.00 against Defendant World Group Yachting. b. Plaintiff American Marine Tech., Inc. is AWARDED $34,439.04 in prejudgment interest against Defendant World Group Yachting. c. Plaintiff American Marine Tech., Inc. is AWARDED $8,490.18 in prejudgment interest against the Vessel.
d.
Finally, Plaintiff American Marine Tech., Inc. is AWARDED post judgment interest against both Defendants, jointly and severally, accruing at .09% from March 16, 2021, the date of the Final Judgment. See 28 U.S.C § 1961(b).
3. Plaintiffs Motions for Appellate Attorneys’ Fees (DE ) and (DE ) is
GRANTED.
a. Plaintiff American Marine Tech., Inc. is AWARDED appellate attorneys’ fees in the amount of $51,860.00 against Defendant World Group Yachting, Inc. b. Defendant World Group Yachting, Inc. is ORDERED to pay Plaintiff American Marine Tech., Inc.'s appellate attorneys’ fees in the amount of $51,860.00.
4. The Clerk of Court is directed to CLOSE this case and DENY all pending motions as moot. DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers, Fort Lauderdale, Florida, this 19th day of September 2022. \ <=
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies furnished to counsel of record via CM/ECF