From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mehta v. New York Life Insurance Company

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division
Jul 28, 2009
Case No. 8:09-cv-59-T-33TGW (M.D. Fla. Jul. 28, 2009)

Opinion

Case No. 8:09-cv-59-T-33TGW.

July 28, 2009


ORDER


This matter is before the Court on consideration of United States Magistrate Judge Thomas G. Wilson's Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 26), issued on June 30, 2009, which recommends that Plaintiff's Motion for Leave of Court to Amend Complaint, Motion to Remand and Motion for Attorney's Fees and Costs (Doc. # 8) be denied.

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 regarding the motions.

Accordingly, it is now

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

1. United States Magistrate Thomas G. Wilson's Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 26) is and 2. Plaintiff's Motion for Leave of Court to Amend Complaint, Motion to Remand and Motion for Attorney's Fees and Costs (Doc. # 8) are DONE and ORDERED in Tampa, Florida.


Summaries of

Mehta v. New York Life Insurance Company

United States District Court, M.D. Florida, Tampa Division
Jul 28, 2009
Case No. 8:09-cv-59-T-33TGW (M.D. Fla. Jul. 28, 2009)
Case details for

Mehta v. New York Life Insurance Company

Case Details

Full title:RUPA MEHTA, Plaintiff, v. NEW YORK LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY, et al.…

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

Date published: Jul 28, 2009

Citations

Case No. 8:09-cv-59-T-33TGW (M.D. Fla. Jul. 28, 2009)

Citing Cases

Thomas v. Big Lots Stores, Inc.

When "a plaintiff seeks to add a non-diverse defendant immediately after removal but before any additional…

Seropian v. Wachovia Bank, N.A.

Lastly, the Court notes that where, as here, the motion to amend and motion to remand are simultaneous and…