From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Heise v. Porcelli

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division
Sep 8, 2008
Case No. 8:07-Civ-1866-T-24-MAP (M.D. Fla. Sep. 8, 2008)

Opinion

Case No. 8:07-Civ-1866-T-24-MAP.

September 8, 2008


ORDER


This cause comes before the Court on Defendant Thomas Clayton Little's and Defendant Southeast Advertising, Inc.'s Motions to Dismiss (Doc. Nos. 50 — 51). These Motions were considered by the United States Magistrate Judge, pursuant to a specific order of referral. Magistrate Judge Pizzo has filed his report recommending that the Defendants' Motions be denied. (Doc. No. 56). All parties were furnished copies of the Report and Recommendation and were afforded the opportunity to file objections pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). No such objections were filed. Upon consideration of the Report and Recommendation, and upon this Court's independent examination of the file, it is determined that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that

(1) The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. No. 56) is adopted and incorporated by reference in this Order of the Court; and
(2) The Motions to Dismiss of Defendants Little and Southeast Advertising (Doc. Nos. 50-51), Inc. are DENIED.
DONE AND ORDERED at Tampa, Florida.


Summaries of

Heise v. Porcelli

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division
Sep 8, 2008
Case No. 8:07-Civ-1866-T-24-MAP (M.D. Fla. Sep. 8, 2008)
Case details for

Heise v. Porcelli

Case Details

Full title:JAMES HEISE, ET AL., Plaintiff, v. PETER JAMES PORCELLI, ET AL., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division

Date published: Sep 8, 2008

Citations

Case No. 8:07-Civ-1866-T-24-MAP (M.D. Fla. Sep. 8, 2008)

Citing Cases

Gemma v. Sweeney

The Court is mindful that neither § 7-15-2(c) nor F.S.A. § 772.103(3) require a pattern of predicate acts in…