Marine Diesel Specialists, Inc. v. M/Y "20%
Filing
37
OPINION AND ORDER adopting 36 Report and Recommendations; denying 22 Motion to Show Cause Why Arrest. Signed by Judge John E. Steele on 6/11/2018. (RKR)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
MARINE DIESEL SPECIALISTS,
INC.,
a
Florida
profit
corporation,
Plaintiff,
v.
Case No:
2:17-cv-689-FtM-99MRM
M/Y
“20%”,
a
Viking
manufactured motorized 64’
pleasure yacht, her boats,
engines, tackle, equipment,
apparel,
furnishings,
freights, appurtenances, and
all
fixtures
and
other
necessaries
there
unto
appertaining and belonging
to the vessel, in rem. and
DAVID
SIMPSON,
an
individual, in personam,
Defendants.
OPINION AND ORDER
This matter is before the Court on consideration of the
Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. #36), filed May
24, 2018, recommending that the Motion to Show Cause Why Arrest of
MV "20%" Should Not Be Vacated (Doc. #22) be denied.
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.
636(b)(1);
28 U.S.C. §
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).
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 conducted an evidentiary hearing where
he heard testimony and admitted evidence.
The Magistrate Judge
found that plaintiff established by a preponderance of the evidence
the reasonableness of the costs of repairs as compared to what
other competitors in the industry would charge, and that the
repairs to the vessel were at the direction of the owner or the
owner’s agent, the two contested elements.
After conducting 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.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
1.
The
Report
and
Recommendation
(Doc.
adopted and the findings incorporated herein.
- 2 -
#36)
is
hereby
2.
The vessel's Motion to Show Cause Why Arrest of MV "20%"
Should Not Be Vacated (Doc. #22) is DENIED.
DONE and ORDERED at Fort Myers, Florida, this
of June, 2018.
Copies:
Hon. Mac R. McCoy
United States Magistrate Judge
Counsel of Record
Unrepresented parties
- 3 -
11th
day
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?