Gitten et al v. The School Board of Lee County, Florida

Filing 49

ORDER adopting 48 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 34 MOTION to Certify Class and incorporated memorandum of law filed by Gwynetta Gittens, Jerald Thompson, Preston Towns, Stephanie Lawrence. The Report and Recommendation 48 is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED and the findings incorporated herein. Plaintiffs' Motion to Certify a Class Action Pursuant to Rule 23(B)(1) and (3) 34 is DENIED Signed by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 7/24/2017. (LMF)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION GWYNETTA GITTENS, JERALD THOMPSON, STEPHANIE LAWRENCE and PRESTON TOWNS, an individual Plaintiffs, v. Case No: 2:16-cv-412-FtM-99MRM THE SCHOOL BOARD OF LEE COUNTY, FLORIDA, Defendant. / OPINION AND ORDER1 This matter comes before the Court upon review of United States Magistrate Judge Mac R. McCoy’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 48) filed on July 7, 2017. Judge McCoy recommends denying Plaintiffs’ Motion to Certify a Class Action Pursuant to Rule 23(B)(1) and (3) (Doc. 34). No objections have been filed and the time to do so has expired. A district judge "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)(1). If no specific objections to findings of fact are filed, the district judge 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. 1 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. 1993). However, the district judge must review 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). After careful consideration of the Report and Recommendation and an independent review of the file, the Court adopts, accepts, and approves the Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: (1) The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 48) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED and the findings incorporated herein. (2) Plaintiffs’ Motion to Certify a Class Action Pursuant to Rule 23(B)(1) and (3) (Doc. 34) is DENIED. DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida this 24th day of July, 2017. Copies: Hon. Mac R. McCoy All Parties of Record 2

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?