From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thompson v. Vesper USF, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION
Nov 24, 2015
Case No. 8:15-cv-2361-T-33MAP (M.D. Fla. Nov. 24, 2015)

Opinion

Case No. 8:15-cv-2361-T-33MAP

11-24-2015

GEORGIA L. THOMPSON, Plaintiff, v. VESPER USF, LLC d/b/a THE POINTE AT SOUTH FLORIDA, Defendant.


ORDER

This matter is before the Court on consideration of United States Magistrate Judge Mark A. Pizzo's Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 13), filed on October 28, 2015, recommending that Plaintiff's motions for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. # 11) be denied and that Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint (Doc. # 10) be dismissed as frivolous.

As of this date, there are no objections to the report and recommendation, and the time for the parties to file such objections has elapsed.

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. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983). 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. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Castro Bobadilla v. Reno, 826 F. Supp. 1428, 1431-32 (S.D. Fla. 1993), aff'd, 28 F.3d 116 (11th Cir. 1994) (Table).

After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings, conclusions and recommendations, and giving de novo review to matters of law, the Court accepts the factual findings and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge and the recommendation of the magistrate judge.

Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED: (1) The Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 13) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. (2) Plaintiff's motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. # 11) is DENIED. Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint (Doc. # 10) is DISMISSED. (3) The Clerk is directed to close this case.

DONE and ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Florida, this 24th day of November, 2015.

/s/_________

VIRGINIA M. HERNANDEZ COVINGTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies: All Counsel and Parties of Record


Summaries of

Thompson v. Vesper USF, LLC

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION
Nov 24, 2015
Case No. 8:15-cv-2361-T-33MAP (M.D. Fla. Nov. 24, 2015)
Case details for

Thompson v. Vesper USF, LLC

Case Details

Full title:GEORGIA L. THOMPSON, Plaintiff, v. VESPER USF, LLC d/b/a THE POINTE AT…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

Date published: Nov 24, 2015

Citations

Case No. 8:15-cv-2361-T-33MAP (M.D. Fla. Nov. 24, 2015)