MAERSK LINE A/S
v.
HARIBO FOOD 2004, INC.

S.D. Fla. | 2021-09-27
No. 20-20666-Civ
2017 WL 443634 District Court, S.D. Florida (2021) Positive Treatment
Also reported at: 2016 WL 7321208
Cited by 50 cases

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.


Holding

Plaintiff's motion for final judgment in garnishment should be granted.


Facts & Procedural History

Plaintiff obtained a default final judgment against defendants. Plaintiff then sought a final judgment in garnishment against Garnishee FirstBank Flor…

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.


Opinion of the Court

This matter is before the Court’s on Maersk Line A/S’s (“Plaintiff”) second motion for final judgment against Garnishee FirstBank Florida in the amount of $4,387.951 as set forth in the Garnishee’s answer to the writs of garnishment. [D.E. 65]. No timely response was filed in opposition to the motion.2 Therefore, Plaintiff’s

shall bar the parties from de novo determination by the District Judge of any factual or legal issue covered in the Report and shall bar the parties from challenging on appeal the District Judge’s Order based on any unobjected-to factual or legal conclusions included in the Report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); 11th Cir. Rule 3-1; see, e.g., Patton v. Rowell, 2017 WL 443634 (11th Cir. Feb.2, 2017); Cooley v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 2016 WL 7321208 (11th Cir. Dec. 16, 2016).

DONE AND SUBMITTED in Chambers at Miami, Florida this 27th day of September, 2021.

/s/ Edwin G. Torres

EDWIN G. TORRES

United States Magistrate Judge

Footnotes
1 This is the balance due on the $29,606.79 default final judgment.
2 Because no opposition or motion for exemption was filed in response to Plaintiff’s motion, the entry of this Order should also be granted by default under Local Rule 7.1. motion is now ripe for disposition. After careful consideration of the motion and relevant authority, Plaintiff’s second motion for final judgment in garnishment should be GRANTED.3 Pursuant to Local Magistrate Rule 4(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 73, the parties have fourteen (14) days from service of this Report and Recommendation within which to file written objections, if any, with the District Judge. Failure to timely file objections
3 The Court should reserve jurisdiction to enter all further orders as necessary, including an order authorizing execution against the Garnishee’s property if the judgment is not otherwise paid or satisfied. Upon garnishment, FirstBank shall be absolved of any further liability in this matter.

Cases With Similar Vibessemantic neighbors from the corpus


Citator

Cited By (25 total)

  • Maersk Line A/S v. Haribo Food 2004, Inc., 2017 WL 443634 (S.D. Fla. 2021)
    …t Judge’s Order based on any unobjected-to factual or legal conclusions included in the Report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); 11th Cir. Rule 3-1; see, e.g., Patton v. Rowell, 2017 WL 443634 (11th Cir. Feb. 2, 2017); Cooley v. Comm’r of Soc. Sec., 2016 WL 7321208 (11th Cir. Dec. 16, 2016). DONE AND SUBMITTED in Chambers at Miami, Florida this 27th day of September, 2021. /s/ Edwin G. Torres EDWIN G. TORRES United States Magistrate Judge 3 The Court should reserve jurisdiction to enter all further orde…
    1 / 2
  • …red in the Report and shall bar the parties from challenging on appeal the District Judge's Order based on any unobjected-to factual or legal conclusions included in the Report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); 11th Cir. Rule 3-1; see, e.g., Patton v. Rowell, 2017 WL 443634 (11th Cir. Feb. 2, 2017); Cooley v. Commissioner of Social Security, 2016 WL 7321208 (11th Cir. Dec. 16, 2016). ---PAGE 6--- 6 Case 1:19-cv-20896-RNS Document 964 Entered on FLSD Docket 08/28/2025 Page 7 of 7 DONE and SUBMITTED in Chambers at Miam…
    1 / 2
  • …Judge's Order based on any unobjected-to factual or legal conclusions included in the Report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); 11th Cir. Rule 3-1; see, e.g., Patton v. Rowell, 2017 WL 443634 (11th Cir. Feb. 2, 2017); Cooley v. Commissioner of Social Security, 2016 WL 7321208 (11th Cir. Dec. 16, 2016). DONE and SUBMITTED in Chambers at Miami, Florida this 27th day of August, 2025. /s/ Edwin G. Torres EDWIN G. TORRES United States Magistrate Judge ---PAGE 7--- 1 On July 23, 2025, the Honorable Robert N. Scola referre…
    1 / 2

Previewing 3 of 25 citing cases — full citator treatment, depth of discussion, and citing context are member features.

Join FLexlaw to unlock all legal intelligence

Authorities Cited

Full citator, related cases, and AI research tools

Open in FLexlaw