From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Fox v. The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Co.

United States District Court, Southern District of Florida
Sep 2, 2022
17-24284-Civ-COOKE/Damian (S.D. Fla. Sep. 2, 2022)

Opinion

17-24284-Civ-COOKE/Damian

09-02-2022

MICHAEL FOX, Plaintiff, v. THE RITZ-CARLTON HOTEL COMPANY, LLC, Defendant.


ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

KATHLEEN M. WILLIAMS, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE.

THIS CAUSE is before the Court upon the Report and Recommendation of the Honorable Melissa Damian, U.S. Magistrate Judge [ECF No. 135], regarding Plaintiff Michael Fox's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment [ECF No. 92]. In her Report, Judge Damian recommends that the Motion be denied on the basis that Miami-Dade County Code Section 8A-110.1(3) is preempted by Florida law, and therefore is not a valid predicate for per se violation of the Florida Deceptive and Unfair Trade Practices Act. The parties have not filed objections to the Report, and the time to do so has passed.

When a magistrate judge's disposition has properly been objected to, district courts must review the disposition de novo. FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3). When no party has timely objected, as here, “the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” FED. R. CIV. P. 72 advisory committee's notes (citation omitted). Although Rule 72 itself is silent on the standard of review, the Supreme Court has acknowledged Congress's intent was to only require a de novo review where objections have been properly filed, not when neither party objects. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) (“It does not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate [judge]'s factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings.” (alteration added)).

The Court has reviewed the Motion, the briefing and accompanying exhibits, Judge Damian's Report, the record, and the relevant legal authorities. There is no clear error on the face of the record. Accordingly, it is

ORDERED and ADJUDGED that Judge Damian's Report [ECF No. 135] is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED and the Motion [ECF No. 92] is DENIED.

DONE and ORDERED.

Marcia G. Cooke, United States District Judge.

Melissa Damian, U.S. Magistrate Judge.


Summaries of

Fox v. The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Co.

United States District Court, Southern District of Florida
Sep 2, 2022
17-24284-Civ-COOKE/Damian (S.D. Fla. Sep. 2, 2022)
Case details for

Fox v. The Ritz-Carlton Hotel Co.

Case Details

Full title:MICHAEL FOX, Plaintiff, v. THE RITZ-CARLTON HOTEL COMPANY, LLC, Defendant.

Court:United States District Court, Southern District of Florida

Date published: Sep 2, 2022

Citations

17-24284-Civ-COOKE/Damian (S.D. Fla. Sep. 2, 2022)