From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Nautilus Insurance Company v. Feliz

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Jacksonville Division
Sep 6, 2011
Case No.: 3:10-cv-557-J-34JBT (M.D. Fla. Sep. 6, 2011)

Opinion

Case No.: 3:10-cv-557-J-34JBT.

September 6, 2011


ORDER


THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 31; Report), entered by the Honorable Joel B. Toomey, United States Magistrate Judge, on August 3, 2011. In the Report, Magistrate Judge Toomey recommends that the Motion for Final Default Judgment (Dkt. No. 16) and the Stipulated Motion for Entry of Consent Judgment (Dkt. No. 21) be granted and that the Clerk of Court be directed to enter judgment and close the file.See Report at 10. Defendants have failed to file objections to the Report, and the time for doing so has now passed.

The Court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). If no specific objections to findings of facts are filed, the district court is not required to conduct a de novo review of those findings. See Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n. 9 (11th Cir. 1993); see also 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, the district court must review legal conclusions de novo. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); United States v. Rice, No. 2:07-mc-8-FtM-29SPC, 2007 WL 1428615, at * 1 (M.D. Fla. May 14, 2007).

Upon independent review of the file and for the reasons stated in the Magistrate Judge's Report, the Court will accept and adopt the legal and factual conclusions recommended by the Magistrate Judge. Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED:

1. The Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Dkt. No. 31) is ADOPTED as the opinion of the Court.

2. The Motion for Final Default Judgment (Dkt. No. 16) is GRANTED.

3. The Stipulated Motion for Entry of Consent Judgment (Dkt. No. 21) is GRANTED.

4. The Clerk of the Court is directed to enter judgment in favor of Plaintiff Nautilus Insurance Company and against Defendants Jose Manuel Perez Feliz, William Kirk Koon d/b/a K H Timber, and Michael Thompson, declaring that Nautilus Insurance Company owes no duty to defend or indemnify the claims made against William Kirk Koon d/b/a K H Timber and Michael Thompson in the lawsuit brought against them by Jose Manuel Perez Feliz.

5. The Clerk of the Court is further directed to terminate any pending motions and close the file.

DONE AND ORDERED at Jacksonville, Florida, this 2nd day of September, 2011.


Summaries of

Nautilus Insurance Company v. Feliz

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Jacksonville Division
Sep 6, 2011
Case No.: 3:10-cv-557-J-34JBT (M.D. Fla. Sep. 6, 2011)
Case details for

Nautilus Insurance Company v. Feliz

Case Details

Full title:NAUTILUS INSURANCE COMPANY, an Arizona Corporation, Plaintiff, v. JOSE…

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

Date published: Sep 6, 2011

Citations

Case No.: 3:10-cv-557-J-34JBT (M.D. Fla. Sep. 6, 2011)