From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Toufighjou v. Tritschler

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION
Oct 18, 2016
Case No. 8:16-cv-1709-T-33JSS (M.D. Fla. Oct. 18, 2016)

Opinion

Case No. 8:16-cv-1709-T-33JSS

10-18-2016

ARSALAN TOUFIGHJOU, Plaintiff, v. RACHEL TRITSCHLER, Defendant.


ORDER

This matter is before the Court on consideration of United States Magistrate Judge Julie S. Sneed's Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 39), filed on September 30, 2016, recommending that Plaintiff's Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs (Doc. # 25) be granted in the total amount of $23,214.10.

Defendant, who is proceeding pro se at this juncture, had the opportunity to file an objection to the Report and Recommendation, but declined to do so. The time for Defendant to file an objection has now elapsed. As discussed below, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. Discussion

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).

The Report and Recommendation thoroughly and thoughtfully addresses the issues presented and, 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

ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED: (1) United States Magistrate Judge Julie S. Sneed's Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 39) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. (2) Plaintiff's Motion for Attorneys' Fees and Costs (Doc. # 25) is GRANTED. Plaintiff is specifically awarded $15,554.25 in attorneys' fees, $1,584 in costs, $4,732.02 in Plaintiff's expenses, and $1,343.83 in expenses for Plaintiff's counsel. The total award amounts to $23,214.10.

DONE and ORDERED in Chambers, in Tampa, Florida, this 18th day of October, 2016.

/s/_________

VIRGINIA M. HERNANDEZ COVINGTON

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Toufighjou v. Tritschler

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION
Oct 18, 2016
Case No. 8:16-cv-1709-T-33JSS (M.D. Fla. Oct. 18, 2016)
Case details for

Toufighjou v. Tritschler

Case Details

Full title:ARSALAN TOUFIGHJOU, Plaintiff, v. RACHEL TRITSCHLER, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION

Date published: Oct 18, 2016

Citations

Case No. 8:16-cv-1709-T-33JSS (M.D. Fla. Oct. 18, 2016)

Citing Cases

Romanov v. Soto

Depending on the information that the Mother provides, the Court could find that awarding the full amount of…

Neiuwenhoven v. Pisani

Toufighjou v. Tritschler, No. 8:16-CV-1709-T-33JSS, 2016 WL 6122465, at *2 (M.D. Fla. Sept. 30, 2016),…