United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida, 2025

Marine Towing & Salvage of S.W. FL., Inc. v. One 66' 2019 Sabre Dirigo

Marine Towing & Salvage of S.W. FL., Inc. v. One 66' 2019 Sabre Dirigo
United States District Court for the Middle District of Florida · Decided February 24, 2025
Marine Towing & Salvage of S.W. FL., Inc. v. One 66' 2019 Sabre Dirigo

Trial Court Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA FORT MYERS DIVISION MARINE TOWING & SALVAGE OF S.W. FL., INC., Plaintiff, v. Case No.: 2:22-cv-346-SPC-KCD ONE 66’ 2019 SABRE DIRIGO, MONTE BRIGGS, and EYRIE HOLDINGS, LLC, Defendants. / ORDER Before the Court is Defendants’ Supplemental Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs (Doc. 110), Plaintiff’s Response (Doc. 114), and United States Magistrate Judge Kyle C. Dudek’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 116).

Judge Dudek recommends that Defendants’ motion be granted in part and denied in part. No party objected, so the matter is ripe for review.

After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part,” a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). In the absence of a specific objection, there is no requirement that a district judge review a report and recommendation de novo. See Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993). Instead, when parties don’t object, a district court need only correct plain error as demanded by the interests of justice. See, e.g., Symonette v. V.A. Leasing Corp., 648 F. App’x 787, 790 (11th Cir. 2016); Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150-52 (1985).

Plain error exists if (1) “an error occurred”; (2) “the error was plain”; (3) “it affected substantial rights”; and (4) “not correcting the error would seriously affect the fairness of the judicial proceedings.” Farley v. Nationwide Mut. Ins., 197 F.3d 1322, 1329 (11th Cir. 1999).

After careful consideration and an independent review of the case, the Court finds no plain error. It accepts and adopts the Report and Recommendation in full.

Accordingly, it is now ORDERED: 1. Judge Dudek’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 116) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED, and the findings incorporated herein.

2. Defendants’ Supplemental Motion for Attorney’s Fees and Costs (Doc. 110) is GRANTED IN PART AND DENIED IN PART as follows: a. The Court awards $234,648.05 in attorney’s fees; b. The Court awards $30,679.53 in costs; and c. The Clerk is DIRECTED to amend the judgment to include these figures.

DONE and ORDERED in Fort Myers, Florida on February 24, 2025.

, UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Copies: All Parties of Record

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.