McFalls v. NCH Healthcare System, Inc. et al

Filing 122

ORDERED: Judge Dudek's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 121) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED, and the findings are incorporated herein. Plaintiff's Motion for Class Certification (Doc. 94) is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART: Plaintiff� 39;s request to certify a class under FDUTPA of "[a]ll nurses who are or were subject to NCH's Specialty Fellowship Program Employment Agreement and the training repayment provisions therein at any point from July 31, 2019, through" th e date of certification is GRANTED; Plaintiff's request to certify the same class under Florida's Declaratory Judgment Act is DENIED; the Court appoints Nichols Kaster, PLLP, Towards Justice, and Varnell & Warwick as class counsel to repr esent the certified class; and Plaintiff's motion is DENIED to the extent it seeks any further relief. On or before March 12, 2025, Plaintiff must file a new notice consistent with the final class as certified. Signed by Judge Sheri Polster Chappell on 3/5/2025. (AEH)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT MYERS DIVISION
LAUREN MCFALLS, individually,
and on behalf of all others similarly
situated and the Proposed Rule 23
Class,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No.: 2:23-cv-572-SPC-KCD

NCH HEALTHCARE SYSTEM,
INC. and NAPLES COMMUNITY
HOSPITAL, INC.,
Defendants.

/
OPINION AND ORDER

Before the Court are Plaintiff Lauren McFalls’ Motion for Class
Certification (Doc. 94) and United States Magistrate Judge Kyle C. Dudek’s
Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. 121). Judge Dudek recommends
granting the motion in part and denying it in part. No party objected, so the
matter is ripe for review.
After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and
recommendations, a district judge “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or
in part,” a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation.

28 U.S.C.

§ 636(b)(1)(C). In the absence of specific objections, there is no requirement
that a district judge review the report and recommendation de novo. See

Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993). Instead, when
parties don’t object, a district court need only correct plain error as demanded
by the interests of justice. See, e.g., Symonette v. V.A. Leasing Corp., 648 F.
App’x 787, 790 (11th Cir. 2016); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150-52 (1985).
Plain error exists if (1) “an error occurred”; (2) “the error was plain”; (3) “it
affected substantial rights”; and (4) “not correcting the error would seriously
affect the fairness of the judicial proceedings.” Farley v. Nationwide Mut. Ins.,
197 F.3d 1322, 1329 (11th Cir. 1999).
After careful consideration and an independent review of the case, the
Court finds no plain error. It accepts and adopts the R&R in full.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
1. Judge

Dudek’s

Report

and

Recommendation

(Doc.

121)

is

ACCEPTED and ADOPTED, and the findings incorporated herein.
2. Plaintiff’s Motion for Class Certification (Doc. 94) is GRANTED IN
PART and DENIED IN PART:
a. Plaintiff’s request to certify a class under FDUTPA of “[a]ll
nurses who are or were subject to NCH’s Specialty Fellowship
Program Employment Agreement and the training repayment
provisions therein at any point from July 31, 2019, through” the
date of certification is GRANTED;

b. Plaintiff’s request to certify the same class under Florida’s
Declaratory Judgment Act is DENIED;
c. the Court appoints Nichols Kaster, PLLP, Towards Justice, and
Varnell & Warwick as class counsel to represent the certified
class; and
d. Plaintiff’s motion is DENIED to the extent it seeks any further
relief.
3. On or before March 12, 2025, Plaintiff must file a new notice
consistent with the final class as certified.
DONE AND ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on March 5, 2025.

Copies: All Parties of Record