Opinion
21-14036-CIV-CANN/Maynard
05-19-2022
ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
AILEEN M. CANNON UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon Defendant's Motion for Attorney Fees [ECF No. 25]. On January 3, 2022, the Court referred Defendant's Motion to Magistrate Judge Shaniek M. Maynard for a Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 35]. Judge Maynard thereafter issued a Report (“R&R”) recommending that Defendant's Motion denied [ECF No. 39]. Neither party has filed an objection to the R&R.
Upon review, the Court finds the R&R to be well reasoned and correct. The Court therefore agrees with the analysis in the R&R and concludes that Defendant's Motion [ECF No. 25] should be DENIED for the reasons set forth therein. In adopting the R&R, the Court expressly reiterates what other courts and Judge Maynard have observed-that it does not condone Segal's intolerable tactics and again cautions Segal that both he and his law firm may very well be subject to sanctions in the future if it is found that he is engaged in conduct that “abuses the judicial process.” Peer v. Lewis, 571 Fed.Appx. 840, 844 (11th Cir. 2014) (quoting Chambers v. NASCO, Inc., 501 U.S. 32, 44-45 (1991)).
Accordingly, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows:
1. The R&R [ECF No. 39] is ACCEPTED.
2. Defendant's Motion [ECF No. 25] is DENIED.
DONE AND ORDERED.