From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Rosas v. Geovera Specialty Ins. Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION
Feb 21, 2019
Case No: 2:18-cv-586-FtM-99UAM (M.D. Fla. Feb. 21, 2019)

Opinion

Case No: 2:18-cv-586-FtM-99UAM

02-21-2019

OSCAR ROSAS and RAQUEL BURICH, Plaintiffs, v. GEOVERA SPECIALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.


OPINION AND ORDER

Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or websites. These hyperlinks are provided only for users' convenience. Users are cautioned that hyperlinked documents in CM/ECF are subject to PACER fees. By allowing hyperlinks to other websites, this Court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their websites. Likewise, the Court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their websites. The Court accepts no responsibility for the availability or functionality of any hyperlink. Thus, the fact that a hyperlink ceases to work or directs the user to some other site does not affect the opinion of the Court. --------

Before the Court is U.S. Magistrate Judge Douglas N. Frazier's Report and Recommendation (R&R) (Doc. 50), recommending that Geovera Specialty Insurance Company's Unopposed Motion to Strike Portions of Complaint (Doc. 16) be granted. No party has objected to the R&R, and the time to do so has expired.

After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify the magistrate judge's report and recommendation. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); see also Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982). In the absence of specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review factual findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993), 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). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. Southern Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994).

Here, Judge Frazier considered the arguments made by the parties and determined that Geovera's request to strike Plaintiffs' references to Chapter 627 of the Florida Statutes in the Complaint, including the request for attorneys' fees under Section 627.428, should be granted because Geovera is a surplus lines insurer and Chapter 627 does not apply to surplus lines carriers. After independently examining the file and on consideration of Judge Frazier's findings and recommendations, the Court accepts and adopts the R&R.

Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED:

(1) U.S. Magistrate Judge Mac R. Frazier's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 23) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED.

(2) Geovera Specialty Insurance Company's Unopposed Motion to Strike Portions of Complaint (Doc. 16) is GRANTED, and the references to Chapter 627 of the Florida Statutes in paragraphs 10, 11, 17, and the "WHEREFORE" paragraph of the Complaint (Doc. 2) are STRICKEN.

DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this 21st day of February, 2019.

/s/ _________

SHERI POLSTER CHAPPELL

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Copies: All Parties of Record


Summaries of

Rosas v. Geovera Specialty Ins. Co.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION
Feb 21, 2019
Case No: 2:18-cv-586-FtM-99UAM (M.D. Fla. Feb. 21, 2019)
Case details for

Rosas v. Geovera Specialty Ins. Co.

Case Details

Full title:OSCAR ROSAS and RAQUEL BURICH, Plaintiffs, v. GEOVERA SPECIALTY INSURANCE…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION

Date published: Feb 21, 2019

Citations

Case No: 2:18-cv-586-FtM-99UAM (M.D. Fla. Feb. 21, 2019)