GALVIN v. CHILDERS

CourtDistrict Court, N.D. Florida
DecidedAugust 5, 2024
Docket3:24-cv-00340
StatusUnknown

This text of GALVIN v. CHILDERS (GALVIN v. CHILDERS) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Florida primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook
GALVIN v. CHILDERS, (N.D. Fla. 2024).

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA PENSACOLA DIVISION

DAVID WARREN GALVIN, JR., and SUSAN E. GALVIN,

Plaintiffs,

v. Case No. 3:24-cv-340-TKW-HTC

PAM CHILDERS,

Defendant. ___________________________/ ORDER This case is before the Court based on the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 6) and Plaintiffs’ objection (Doc. 8). The Court reviewed the issues raised in the objection de novo as required by 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3), and based on that review, the Court agrees with the magistrate judge’s determination that this case should be dismissed for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. The Court did not overlook Plaintiffs’ argument that they “DID NOT and DO NOT consent to the magistrate judge’s handling any portion of this case,” but that argument is frivolous because the parties’ consent is not required to refer a case to a magistrate judge under 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(B) for the issuance of a report and recommendation. See, e.g., Wright v. Sprayberry, 817 F. App’x 725, 729 (11th Cir. 2020); U.S. Bank, N.A. as trustee for LSF8 Master Participation Tr. v. Tobin, 754 Page 2 of 2

F. App’x 843, 846 (11th Cir. 2018). And that is what was done in this case. See N.D. Fla. Loc. R. 72.2(E) (explaining that pro se cases filed by non-prisoners will be referred to the magistrate judge “for all proceedings, including ... filing ofa report and recommendation containing proposed findings of fact and conclusions of law and recommending disposition of the case’’). Accordingly, it is ORDERED that: 1. The magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 6) is adopted and incorporated by reference in this Order. 2. This case is DISMISSED without prejudice for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction. 3. All pending motions are DENIED as moot. 4. The Clerk shall enter judgment in accordance with this Order and close the case file. DONE and ORDERED this 5th day of August, 2024. □□ Wood T.KENT WETHERELL,I UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case No. 3:24-cv-340-TKW-HTC

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

Related

United States v. Thadhani
2 F. App'x 843 (Ninth Circuit, 2001)

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)
GALVIN v. CHILDERS, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/galvin-v-childers-flnd-2024.