Popov v. George & Sons Towing, Inc. et al

Filing 96

ORDER that 94 Report and Recommendation is hereby adopted and the findings incorporated herein. The parties' 93 Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement and Dismissal of This Action With Prejudice is granted to the extent the parties' se ek approval of their settlement and dismissal of this case but denied as to the parties' request that the Court retain jurisdiction over this case to enforce the settlement. The Clerk shall enter judgment dismissing the case with prejudice, terminate all deadlines and motions, and close the file. Signed by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 8/7/2013. (DH)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION FLORIN POPOV, on his own behalf and others similarly situated, Plaintiff, v. Case No: 2:12-cv-123-FtM-38UAM GEORGE & SONS TOWING INC., a Florida Corporation, GEORGE MARTIN, individually, and DEBRA MARTIN, individually, Defendants. ___________________________________/ ORDER1 This matter is before the Court on review of the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Dkt. #94), filed on July 19, 2013, recommending that the parties’ Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement and Dismissal of This Action With Prejudice (Dkt. #93) be granted. No objections have been filed 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. 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 1 Disclaimer: Documents filed in CM/ECF may contain hyperlinks to other documents or Web sites. 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 Web sites, this court does not endorse, recommend, approve, or guarantee any third parties or the services or products they provide on their Web sites. Likewise, the court has no agreements with any of these third parties or their Web sites. 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. objections, there is no need for a district judge to 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); 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 an independent examination of the file and upon due consideration of the Report and Recommendation, the Court accepts the Report and Recommendation of the magistrate judge. However, the Court takes this opportunity to address an issue not addressed in the Report and Recommendation: the parties’ request that the Court retain jurisdiction over this case to enforce the settlement agreement. The Court is generally reluctant to retain jurisdiction over these matters and will not do so here. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: (1) The Report and Recommendation (Dkt. #94) is hereby adopted and the findings incorporated herein. (2) The parties’ Joint Motion for Approval of Settlement and Dismissal of This Action With Prejudice (Dkt. #93) is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. It is GRANTED to the extent the parties’ seek approval of their settlement and dismissal of this case but denied as to the parties’ request that the Court retain jurisdiction over this case to enforce the settlement. 2 (3) The Clerk shall enter judgment DISMISSING the case with prejudice, terminate all deadlines and motions, and close the file. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this 7th day of August, 2013. Copies: All Parties of Record 3

Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.


Why Is My Information Online?