Grey v. The Hartford Casualty Insurance Company

Filing 5

ORDER: The Report and Recommendation 4 is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. Plaintiff's Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis 2 is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiff may file a renewed Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis by December 27, 2013. Plaintif f's Complaint 1 is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE for the reasons stated in the Report and Recommendation. Plaintiff is granted leave to file an Amended Complaint by December 27, 2013. Failure to do so may result in the dismissal of this action without further notice. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 11/26/2013. (KAK)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
TAMPA DIVISION
JUANITA GREY,
Plaintiff,
v.

Case No. 8:13-cv-2826-T-33TGW

HARTFORD CASUALTY INSURANCE CO.,
Defendant.
_________________________________/
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on consideration of
United States Magistrate Judge Thomas G. Wilson’s Report and
Recommendation

(Doc.

#

4),

filed

on

November

7,

2013,

recommending that Plaintiff’s Complaint be dismissed without
prejudice and with leave to amend within 30 days.
As of this date, there are no objections to the report
and recommendation, and the time for the parties to file such
objections has elapsed.
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.

28 U.S.C. §

636(b)(1)(C). The district judge reviews legal conclusions de
novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston
v. S. 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).
After conducting a careful and complete review of the
findings, conclusions, and recommendations, and giving de novo
review to matters of law, the Court accepts the factual
findings and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge and the
recommendation of the magistrate judge.
Motion

for

Leave

to

Proceed

in

The Court denies the

forma

pauperis

without

prejudice and dismisses the Complaint without prejudice.
Plaintiff is granted the opportunity to file an Amended
Complaint and renewed motion to proceed in forma pauperis by
December 27, 2013.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:
(1)

The Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 4) is ACCEPTED and
ADOPTED.

(2)

Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. #
2) is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE.
-2-

Plaintiff may file a

renewed Motion to Proceed in forma pauperis by December
27, 2013.
(3)

Plaintiff’s Complaint (Doc. # 1) is DISMISSED WITHOUT
PREJUDICE for the reasons stated in the Report and
Recommendation.

(4)

Plaintiff is granted leave to file an Amended Complaint
by December 27, 2013. Failure to do so may result in the
dismissal of this action without further notice.
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Florida, this 26th

day of November, 2013.

Copies:
All Counsel and Parties of Record

-3-