From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mathew v. S B Engineers Construction, Ltd.

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division
Jan 30, 2009
Case No. 8:08-cv-1801-T-33TGW (M.D. Fla. Jan. 30, 2009)

Summary

holding that evidence of plaintiff's failure to stipulate regarding the jurisdictional amount, her back pay damages of approximately $66,000, and her claim for unspecified compensatory damages was insufficient to establish the jurisdictional amount

Summary of this case from SNEAD v. AAR MANUFACTURING, INC.

Opinion

Case No. 8:08-cv-1801-T-33TGW.

January 30, 2009


ORDER


This cause comes before the Court upon consideration of United States Magistrate Judge Thomas G. Wilson's report and recommendation (Doc. # 16), filed on January 9, 2009, recommending that Plaintiff's motion to remand (Doc. # 6), be granted. As of this date, neither party has filed an objection 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. 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 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.

Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED: ACCEPTED ADOPTED. GRANTED.

(1) United States Magistrate Judge Thomas G. Wilson's report and recommendation (Doc. # 16) is and (2) Plaintiff's motion to remand (Doc. # 6) is (3) This case is remanded to the Circuit Court for the Tenth Judicial Circuit, in and for Polk County, Florida for all further proceedings. The Clerk shall close this case. DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Tampa, Florida.


Summaries of

Mathew v. S B Engineers Construction, Ltd.

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division
Jan 30, 2009
Case No. 8:08-cv-1801-T-33TGW (M.D. Fla. Jan. 30, 2009)

holding that evidence of plaintiff's failure to stipulate regarding the jurisdictional amount, her back pay damages of approximately $66,000, and her claim for unspecified compensatory damages was insufficient to establish the jurisdictional amount

Summary of this case from SNEAD v. AAR MANUFACTURING, INC.
Case details for

Mathew v. S B Engineers Construction, Ltd.

Case Details

Full title:JOY MATHEW, Plaintiff, v. S B ENGINEERS AND CONSTRUCTION, LTD., Defendant

Court:United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division

Date published: Jan 30, 2009

Citations

Case No. 8:08-cv-1801-T-33TGW (M.D. Fla. Jan. 30, 2009)

Citing Cases

Vanterpool v. Amazon.Com.DEDC, LLC

The Complaint does not specify the amount of compensatory damages sought or provide details on the emotional…

SNEAD v. AAR MANUFACTURING, INC.

The cases Defendant relies upon to support its argument that the damages can be calculated through the date…