Clark v. Rockhill Insurance Company

Filing 42

ORDER adopting 41 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS re 33 MOTION to Dismiss Defendant's Counterclaim for Declaratory Relief for Failure to State Cause of Action with Incorporated Memorandum of Law filed by Stacy L. Clark, Donald E. Clark. Signed by Judge Roy B. Dalton, Jr. on 10/9/2018. (ctp)(JLC)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
ORLANDO DIVISION
DONALD E. CLARK; and STACY L.
CLARK,
Plaintiffs,
v.

Case No. 6:18-cv-780-Orl-37KRS

ROCKHILL INSURANCE COMPANY,
Defendant.
_____________________________________
ORDER
In the instant insurance dispute, Plaintiffs bring a breach of contract claim against
Defendant, their insurer, for allegedly denying a claim following water damage to
Plaintiffs’ property. (Doc. 26.) Defendant answered and asserted a counterclaim for
declaratory relief. 1 (Doc. 29, pp. 10–18.) Plaintiffs then moved to dismiss Defendant’s
counterclaim, now before the Court. (Doc. 33 (“Motion”).) As Defendant responded (Doc.
38), the matter is ripe.
On referral, U.S. Magistrate Judge Karla R. Spaulding issued a report
recommending denying the Motion. (Doc. 41 (“R&R”).) She found: (1) a justiciable
controversy plausibly exists regarding the insurance policy, despite issues of fact; and (2)
Defendant’s counterclaim does not seem to be entirely duplicative of Plaintiffs’ claims.

Defendant filed an amended answer following Magistrate Judge Spaulding’s
ruling on Plainitffs’ motion to strike, but that amended answer did not change its
counterclaim. (See Docs. 39, 40.)
1

-1-

(Id. at 6–14.) Thus, Magistrate Judge Spaulding found no reason to dismiss Defendant’s
counterclaim at this time. (Id. at 14.)
Neither party objected to the R&R, and the time for objecting has since passed.
Absent objections, the Court has examined the R&R for clear error. See Wiand v. Wells
Fargo Bank, N.A., No. 8:12-cv-557-T-27EAJ, 2016 WL 355490, at *1 (M.D. Fla. Jan. 28, 2016);
see also Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). Finding none, the Court
concludes that the R&R is due to be adopted in its entirety.
Accordingly, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1.

U.S. Magistrate Judge Karla R. Spaulding’s Report and Recommendation
(Doc. 41) is ADOPTED, CONFIRMED, and made a part of this Order.

2.

Plaintiffs’ Motion to Dismiss Defendant’s Counterclaim for Declaratory
Relief for Failure to State a Cause of Action (Doc. 33) is DENIED.

3.

The operative counterclaim in this action is included in Defendant Rockhill
Insurance Company’s Amended Answer and Affirmative Defenses to
Plaintiffs’ Second Amended Complaint and Incorporated Counterclaim
(Doc. 40).

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Orlando, Florida, on October 9, 2018.

-2-

Copies to:
Counsel of Record

-3-