Hollis v. Miami-Dade Cnty.

Full title: GAMALY HOLLIS, Plaintiff, v. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA et al., Defendants.

Court: United States District Court, Southern District of Florida

Date published: Sep 9, 2022

20-21930-Civ-COOKE/GOODMAN (S.D. Fla. Sep. 9, 2022)

Opinion

20-21930-Civ-COOKE/GOODMAN

09-09-2022

GAMALY HOLLIS, Plaintiff, v. MIAMI-DADE COUNTY, FLORIDA et al., Defendants.

DARRIN P. GAYLES, District Judge.

ORDER ADOPTING AND AFFIRMING U.S. MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

DARRIN P. GAYLES, District Judge.

THIS MATTER is before the Court upon U.S. Magistrate Judge Jonathan Goodman's Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 76) (“R&R”) on Defendant Dorvilier's Motion to Dismiss Counts II and V with prejudice (ECF No. 55) and Defendant Miami-Dade County's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 57). Tn his R&R, Judge Goodman recommends that Defendant Miami-Dade County's Motion to Dismiss be denied as moot because Plaintiff voluntarily dismissed her claims against Miami-Dade County. See ECF No. 76, Report and Recommendation at p. 2. Additionally, Judge Goodman recommends that Defendant Dorvilier's Motion to Dismiss Counts II and V with prejudice be granted, and that Counts II and V of Plaintiffs Second Amended Complaint be dismissed with prejudice. See id. at p. 19. In making this recommendation, Judge Goodman noted that “this is Plaintiffs third attempt at pleading cognizable claims, she should not be allowed another bite at the apple and the Counts should therefore be dismissed with prejudice,” Id.

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). If no party timely objects, however, “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).

The Court has reviewed Judge Goodman's R&R, and notes that the Parties did not file any objections to the R&R. Because the Court finds no clear error, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows:

1. Defendant Miami-Dade County's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 57) is DENIED AS MOOT.

2. Defendant Dorvilier's Motion to Dismiss Counts II and V with prejudice (ECF No. 55) is GRANTED

3. Counts II and V of the Second Amended Complaint are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.

DONE and ORDERED.