The opinion
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
FORT PIERCE DIVISION
CASE NO. 22-14350-CIV-CANNON/McCabe
JOHN C. MCCARTHY,
Plaintiff,
v.
ST. LUCIE COUNTY BOARD OF COMMISSIONERS
and LASHERI BAKER,
Defendants.
_______________________________/
ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION [ECF No. 10]
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court upon the Magistrate Judge’s Report and
Recommendation on Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint (the “Report”)
[ECF No. 10], filed on February 10, 2023. On December 1, 2022, Defendants filed a Motion to
Dismiss Plaintiff’s Complaint (the “Motion”) [ECF No. 6]. On February 10, 2023, following
referral, Judge McCabe issued a Report recommending that the Motion be granted [ECF No. 10
pp. 1, 12]. Objections to the Report were due on February 24, 2023 [ECF No. 10 p. 13]. No party
filed objections, and the time to do so has expired [ECF No. 10 p. 13].
To challenge the findings and recommendations of a magistrate judge, a party must file
specific written objections identifying the portions of the proposed findings and recommendation
to which objection is made. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); Heath v. Jones, 863 F.2d 815, 822
(11th Cir. 1989); Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006). A district court
reviews de novo 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.
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). To the extent a party fails to object to parts of the magistrate judge’s report,
CASE NO. 22-14350-CIV-CANNON/McCabe
the Court may accept the recommendation so long as there is no clear error on the face of the
record. Macort, 208 F. App’x at 784. Legal conclusions are reviewed de novo, even in the absence
of an objection. See LeCroy v. McNeil, 397 F. App’x 554, 556 (11th Cir. 2010); Cooper-Houston
v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994).
Following review of the unobjected-to Report, it is hereby
ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows:
1. The Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 10] is ACCEPTED.
2. The Motion [ECF No. 6] is GRANTED.
3. Plaintiff will have one final opportunity to file an Amended Complaint that is
consistent with the Report [ECF No. 10], but any such Amended Complaint must be
filed on or before April 10, 2023, as a separate docket entry on the docket .' Plaintiff
is reminded that the filing of an Amended Complaint supersedes and replaces the
original complaint. See Reynolds v. Behrman Cap. IV L.P., 988 F.3d 1314, 1319 (11th
Cir.), cert. denied, 142 S. Ct. 239 (2021).
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Fort Pierce, Florida this 27th day of March 2023.
AILEE Z
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
ce: counsel of record
' Following issuance of Judge McCabe’s Report, and prior to the Court’s resolution of the Report,
Plaintiff filed an unauthorized Amended Complaint [ECF No. 11]; the Court therefore struck
Plaintiff's Amended Complaint [ECF No. 12].