Watkins Motor Lines, Inc. v. Crum Forster Ins. Co.

Full title: WATKINS MOTOR LINES, INC., Plaintiff, v. CRUM FORSTER INSURANCE CO., and…

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

Date published: Nov 15, 2006

Case No. 3:06-cv-580-J-33MCR (M.D. Fla. Nov. 15, 2006)

Opinion

Case No. 3:06-cv-580-J-33MCR.

November 15, 2006

ORDER

VIRGINIA COVINGTON, District Judge

This matter is before the Court on consideration of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 26), filed October 12, 2006, recommending that Plaintiff's Motion to Dismiss be denied.¹ No objections have been filed, and the time to do so has expired.

1 The Magistrate Judge had full jurisdiction to decide Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint. Thus, the only issues for review by this Court are the two substantive issues raised in Defendants' Motion to Dismiss: (1) whether the Amended Complaint should be dismissed because Defendant Crum Forster was not a party to the insurance contract; and (2) whether Count IV of the Amended Complaint should be dismissed because it fails to state a cause of action for bad faith. (See Doc. # 14, pp. 1 — 2.) The Court adopts the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation on these two issues.

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.

Accordingly, it is now

ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED:

1. The Report and Recommendation is hereby accepted.

2. Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Amended Complaint (Doc. # 14) is denied as moot.

DONE and ORDERED.