Charmaine Floyd v. Florida Department of Agriculture Consumer Service Division of Licensing

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA

CASE NO. 1:25-cv-23946-LEIBOWITZ/REID

CHARMAINE FLOYD,

Plaintiff,

v.

FLORIDA DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE CONSUMER SERVICE DIVISION OF LICENSING,

Defendant. ______________________________________/ ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

THIS CAUSE is before the Court on the Report and Recommendation on Plaintiff’s Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis [ECF No. 6] (“the R&R”). The R&R recommends that the Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis (“the Motion”) [ECF No. 3] be denied and that the case be dismissed with prejudice. [ECF No. 6 at 12]. The R&R also details Plaintiff’s history of frivolous, harassing litigation and recommends that the Court designate Plaintiff a vexatious litigant and enjoin Plaintiff from “filing any further motion, pleading, or other paper in this action, or from filing another lawsuit in this District without prior approval from the Court or unless it is accompanied by payment of a filing fee, a sworn oath indicating imminent danger of serious personal injury, or representation by an attorney admitted to the bar of this Court.” [Id.]. Based on Plaintiff’s well-documented history of abusive litigation before this Court and others in this district, [see R&R at 7–11], the Court finds it necessary to restrict Plaintiff’s filing privileges. See Watkins, 820 F. App’x at 947 (finding that “the district judge, who had previously handled many of [the vexatious litigant’s] cases, was in the best position to assess [the litigant’s] activities and their effect on the Southern District of Florida’s resources.”). Accordingly, Plaintiff shall be added to the list of restricted filers in the Southern District of Florida. This case was assigned to United States Magistrate Judge Lisette M. Reid pursuant to Administrative Order 2025-11. Thereafter, this case was randomly reassigned to the undersigned. [See ECF No. 5]. Plaintiff did not file an objection within the time permitted. Having reviewed the Motion, the record, the Report and Recommendation, the governing law and finding no error, it is hereby ORDERED AND ADJUDGED as follows: 1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation [ECF No. 6] is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED and fully incorporated herein. 2. ‘The Motion to Proceed In Forma Pauperis [ECF No. 3] is DENIED. 3. This action its DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. ‘The Clerk is instructed to CLOSE this case. All existing deadlines ace TERMINATED, and any pending motions ace DENIED AS MOOT. 4, The Clerk of Court is ORDERED to place Plaintiff Charmaine Floyd on the list of restricted filers. The Clerk is DIRECTED not to accept any future filings from Plaintiff unless Plaintiff (1) pays the filing fee; (2) affirms under oath that he is in imminent threat of serious physical injury; (3) is represented by counsel; or (4) obtains leave of court to file. See Miller v. Donald, 541 F.3d 1091, 1096-98 (11th Cir. 2008) (discussing appropriate restrictions that district courts may place on vexatious litigants). ‘To the extent Plaintiff files a case in another district that is then transferred to this district, the Clerk is directed to notify the judge to whom the case is assigned, in this district, of this Order and Plaintiffs restricted-filer status. DONE AND ORDERED in the Southern District of Florida on December 31, 2025.

□□□ i? = DAVID S. LEIBOWITZ UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

cc: counsel of record