Opinion
Case No. 2:03-cv-500-FtM-29SPC.
September 19, 2005
ORDER
This matter is before the Court on consideration of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. #242), filed February 23, 2005, recommending that the case against the Law Enforcement Defendants should be dismissed with prejudice, and that the Law Enforcement attorney's fees and costs for bringing this Motion and two previous motions to compel (Docs. #130 and 140) should be imposed as sanctions against plaintiff Brian Bevan. Plaintiff filed his Objection (Doc. #255) on March 7, 2005.
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. 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).
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 as an alternative ruling to its Opinion and Order granting summary judgment as to these defendants. The Court finds that plaintiff's failure to comply with the Court's Orders demonstrates a willful and bad faith disregard towards the orders of this Court and the other litigants involved in this case. The Court, however, will not impose the Law Enforcement attorney's fees and costs for bringing this Motion and two previous motions to compel (Doc. #130 and 140) as sanctions against plaintiff.
Accordingly, it is now
ORDERED:
1. The Report and Recommendation is hereby accepted and adopted by the Court to the extent that the Law Enforcement defendants will be dismissed, and otherwise rejected to the extent that the Court declines to impose fees and costs as sanctions. The Objection (Doc. #255) is overruled.
2. In the alternative to the granting of summary judgment, the Court would dismiss with prejudice the Amended Complaint against Mike Scott, in his official capacity as Sheriff of Lee County, Florida, Rodney Shoap, John McDougall, Kenneth Erne, Mark Durling, Harvey Hudnall, Fred Bond, Dave Bonsall, Ross Di Pasquale, and Sergeant Hamilton.
DONE AND ORDERED.