Isaacs v. Keller Williams Realty Inc.
Isaacs v. Keller Williams Realty Inc.
Trial Court Opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
CASE NO. 9:23-cv-81393-LEIBOWITZ/REINHART
DR. JEFF ISAACS,
Plaintiff,
v.
KELLER WILLIAMS REALTY, INC., ,
Defendants.
______________________________________/ ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
THIS MATTER was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Bruce E. Reinhart for a report and recommendation on the following motions: Equestrian Palms, LLC’s Motion to Remand to State Court [ECF No. 65], Makai Southeast, LLC’s Motion to Remand to State Court [ECF No. 66], and Keller Williams Realty, Inc.’s Motion to Remand to State Court [ECF No. 69]. Judge Reinhart has since issued a report, recommending that the Court grant Equestrian Palms, LLC’s Motion to Remand [ECF No. 65] and Makai Southeast, LLC’s Motion to Remand [ECF No. 66] and deny as moot Keller Williams Realty, Inc.’s Motion to Remand [ECF No. 69]. [ECF No. 114]. Plaintiff Dr. Jeff Isaacs (“Dr. Isaacs”) submitted objections to Judge Reinhart’s report and recommendation. [ECF No. 117]. After careful review of the filings, the applicable law, and the record, the Court adopts Judge Reinhart’s report and recommendation [ECF No. 114] in its entirety. “In order to challenge the findings and recommendations of the magistrate judge, a party must file written objections which shall specifically identify the portions of the proposed findings and recommendation to which objection is made and the specific basis for objection.” Macort v. Prem, Inc.,
208 F. App'x 781, 783(11th Cir. 2006) (cleaned up). The objections must also present “supporting legal authority.” L. Mag. J.R. 4(b). Once a district court receives “objections meeting the specificity requirement set out above,” it must “make a de novo determination of those portions of the report to which objection is made and may accept, reject, or modify in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” Macort, 208 F. App'x at 783–84 (cleaned up). Dr. Isaacs submitted objections to Judge Reinhart’s report and recommendation. [ECF No. 117]. The Court has made a de novo review of the issues that the objections to Judge Reinhart’s
report and recommendation present. Having carefully reviewed Judge Reinhart’s report and recommendation and Dr. Isaacs’ objections, the Court finds the resolution of the issues as recommended by Judge Reinhart to be sound and well-reasoned. The Court therefore adopts Judge Reinhart’s recommendation in its entirety. Accordingly, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED: 1. Dr. Isaacs’ Objections to Magistrate Judge Reinhart’s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 117] are OVERRULED. 2. Magistrate Judge Reinhart’s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 114] is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED. 3. Equestrian Palms, LLC’s Motion to Remand to State Court [ECF No. 65] is GRANTED. 4. Makai Southeast, LLC’s Motion to Remand to State Court [ECF No. 66] is GRANTED. 5. Keller Williams Realty, Inc.’s Motion to Remand to State Court [ECF No. 69] is
DENIED AS MOOT. 6. All claims in Dr. Isaacs’ Notice of Removal [ECF No. 56] should be remanded to the Fifteenth Judicial Circuit Court in and for Palm Beach, County, Florida. 7. Equestrian Palms, LLC should be awarded reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs incurred in connection with the filing of its Motion to Remand and Reply in support of the motion. 8. Dr. Isaacs’ Motion to Dismiss the State Court Complaint contained within the Notice of Removal with Prejudice [ECF No. 98] is DENIED AS MOOT. 9. Equestrian Palms, LLC’s Motion for Extension of ‘Time to Hold Plaintiffs Motion to Dismiss in Abeyance Pending Ruling on Motion for Remand and for Extension of Time [ECF No. 106] is DENIED AS MOOT. 10. Equestrian Palms, LLC’s Stipulation of Dismissal [ECF No. 109] is DENIED AS MOOT. 11. Dr. Isaacs’ Stipulation of Dismissal as to Equestrian Palms, LLC [ECF No. 116] is DENIED AS MOOT. 12. Dr. Isaacs’ Alternative Motion for Leave to File/Supplement the Record [ECF No. 112] is DENIED AS MOOT. DONE AND ORDERED in the Southern District of Florida on May 13, 2024.
ie DAVID S, LEIBOWITZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
cc: counsel of record
Reference
- Status
- Unknown