Ashworth v. Glades County Board of County Commissioners

Filing 36

OPINION AND ORDER adopting Report and Recommendation 35 and its findings are incorporated herein. The parties' Joint Stipulation for Dismissal With Prejudice 32 and Motion for Approval of Settlement Agreement 34 are denied without prejudice. The parties shall file an amended joint motion on or before May 30, 2019. If no amended motion is filed, the case will proceed to trial. Signed by Judge John E. Steele on 5/3/2019. (BLW)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
MICHAEL ASHWORTH,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No:

GLADES
COUNTY
BOARD
COUNTY COMMISSIONERS,

2:17-cv-577-FtM-99MRM

OF

Defendant.
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on consideration of the
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. #35), filed
April

18,

2019,

recommending

that

the

Joint

Stipulation

for

Dismissal With Prejudice (Doc. #32) and Motion for Approval of
Settlement Agreement (Doc. #34) be denied without prejudice, and
the parties be directed to elect an option by a certain deadline.
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

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.
636(b)(1)(C).

28 U.S.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).
The Magistrate Judge found that the submitted Agreement and
General Release is not signed by any party, that there is a
discrepancy in the original amount and the ultimate settlement
amount, liquidated damages are not allocated, consideration for
concessions is lacking, the payment attorney’s fees are unclear,
and

there

is

conflicting

retaliation claim.
of

the

file

and

language

concerning

the

dismissed

After conducting an independent examination
upon

due

consideration

of

the

Report

and

Recommendation, the Court accepts the Report and Recommendation of
the Magistrate Judge.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
1.

The

Report

and

Recommendation

(Doc.

#35)

is

hereby

adopted and the findings incorporated herein.
2.
Prejudice

The

parties’

(Doc.

#32)

Joint
and

Stipulation

Motion

for

for

Approval

Agreement (Doc. #34) are denied without prejudice.

- 2 -

Dismissal
of

With

Settlement

3.

The parties shall file an amended joint motion on or

before May 30, 2019.

If no amended motion is filed, the case will

proceed to trial.
DONE and ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, this __3rd__ day of
May, 2019.

Copies:
Hon. Mac R. McCoy
United States Magistrate Judge
Counsel of Record
Unrepresented parties

- 3 -