Opinion
Case No. 6:07-cv-36-Orl-22DAB.
May 3, 2007
ORDER
This cause is before the Court on Omega's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint or, in the alternative, Motion for More Definite Statement (Doc. No. 17), and on Magnum's Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint, or in the alternative, Motion for More Definite Statement (Doc. No. 18).
The United States Magistrate Judge has submitted a Report recommending that the Motions be denied and that sanctions be considered.
After an independent de novo review of the record in this matter, including the objections filed by the defendants (Doc. Nos. 27 and 29), and the Plaintiff's responses thereto (Doc. Nos. 31 and 32), the Court agrees entirely with the findings of fact and conclusions of law in the Report and Recommendation.
Therefore, it is ORDERED as follows:
1. The Report and Recommendation filed March 30, 2007 (Doc. No. 25) is ADOPTED and CONFIRMED and made a part of this Order.
2. Omega's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff's Second Amended Complaint or, in the alternative, Motion for More Definite Statement (Doc. No. 17) is DENIED.
3. Magnum's Motion to Dismiss Second Amended Complaint, or in the alternative, Motion for More Definite Statement (Doc. No. 18) is DENIED.
4. The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that sanctions are warranted. Accordingly, the Court finds that defense counsels behavior in filing the Motions to Dismiss falls well below the standard of practice expected of attorneys practicing before this Court. Counsel for the defendants shall show cause on or before May 18, 2007 why sanctions should not be imposed under Rule 11 and/or Title 18 U.S.C. section 1927.
DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Orlando, Florida.