Opinion
Case No: 2:12-cv-147-FtM-38DNF
06-07-2013
BRADLEY BOYER, Plaintiff, v. FLAGSHIP AUTOMOTIVE CENTER, LLC and RICHARD T. WILLIAMS, Defendants.
ORDER
This matter comes before the Court on consideration of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (hereafter "Report and Recommendation") (Doc. #51), entered on April 10, 2013, recommending that Plaintiff's Verified Application for Attorney's Fees (Doc. #39) filed on January 30, 2013 be granted in part and denied in part and that Plaintiff's Supplemental Application for Attorney's Fees and Costs (Doc. #49) be denied. No objection has been filed to the Report and Recommendation and the deadline to do so has passed.
In the Eleventh Circuit, a district judge may accept, reject or modify the magistrate judge's report and recommendation after conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir.1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112, 103 S. Ct. 744, 74 L. Ed. 2d 964 (1983). A district judge "shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). This requires that the district judge "give fresh consideration to those issues to which specific objection has been made by a party." Jeffrey S. v. State Bd. of Educ., 896 F.2d 507, 512 (11th Cir.1990) (quoting H.R. 1609, 94th Cong. § 2 (1976)). In the absence of specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review factual findings de novo and the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendations. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); see Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n. 9 (11th Cir.1993). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir.1994).
Upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation, and in conjunction with an independent examination of the file, the Court concludes that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects. As the Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge's recommendation that costs in the amount of $350.00 be awarded, the Court will set aside the bill of costs taxed against Defendant in the amount of $623.75, which was entered by the Clerk on March 8, 2013 (Doc. #47) under objection by the Defendant (Doc. #48). An award of costs must be entered by the Clerk under direction by the Court.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
(1) The Report and Recommendation (Doc. #51) entered on April 10, 2013 is adopted, confirmed, and approved in all respects
(2) Plaintiff's Verified Application for Attorney's Fees (Doc. #39) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Plaintiff is awarded the amount of $2,145.00 in
attorney's fees plus costs in the amount of $350.00 for a total award of $2,495.00.
(3) Plaintiff's Supplemental Application for Attorney's Fees and Costs (Doc. #49) is DENIED.
(4) The Bill of Costs taxed against the Defendant in the amount of $623.75 (Doc. #47) is SET ASIDE. The Clerk is directed to make a notation on the docket sheet at Doc. #47, that it is set aside.
DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this 7th day of June, 2013.
____________________________
SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies: All Parties of Record