Rebecca Lynn Harber v. Halifax Health Medical Center, Jill Wheelock, Jane Almy Loewinger, and Kristina Howard

• Court: District Court, M.D. Florida
• Decided: December 17, 2025
• Docket: 6:25-cv-00689
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA ORLANDO DIVISION

REBECCA LYNN HARBER,

Plaintiff,

v. Case No.: 6:25-cv-00689-AGM-LHP

HALIFAX HEALTH MEDICAL CENTER, JILL WHEELOCK, JANE ALMY LOEWINGER, and KRISTINA HOWARD,

Defendants, /

ORDER THIS CAUSE is before the Court on Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss (docs. # 27 and 36; the “Motions”). The Magistrate Judge recommended that the Court grant in part Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss; dismiss Plaintiff’s Amended Complaint (doc. # 16) as a shotgun pleading; permit plaintiff to file a second Amended Complaint; and deny without prejudice the Motions in all other respects. (Doc. # 57). The fourteen-day deadline for objections to the recommendation has passed. No one objected. Absent objection, the Court conducts a “careful and complete” review of the Report and Recommendation. Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732, 732 (11th Cir. 1982) (per curiam) (quotation citation omitted). “Clear error” review applies to portions of the Report and Recommendation to which no objection is made. Macort v. Prem, Inc., 208 F. App’x 781, 784 (11th Cir. 2006) (per curiam) (quotation citation omitted). Legal conclusions are reviewed de novo in the absence of an objection. See LeCroy v. McNeil, 397 F. App’x 554, 556 (11th Cir. 2010) (citation omitted); Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994). The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Wiliams, 681 F.2d at 732. The Magistrate Judge, in a thorough and well-reasoned analysis, found that Plaintiff's amended complaint (doc. # 16) is a shotgun pleading. Having performed a de novo and independent review of the file, and for the sound reasons explained in the Report and Recommendation, this Court agrees.

Therefore, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED that: 1. The Report and Recommendation, (doc # 57), is ADOPTED and made a part of this Order for all purposes. 2. Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss (doc. # 27 and 36) are GRANTED in part. 3. Plaintiff's amended complaint is DISMISSED as a shotgun pleading (doc. # 16). 4. Defendants’ Motions to Dismiss (doc. # 27 and 36) are DENIED without ptejudice in all other respects. 5. Plaintiff is granted until December 29, 2025, to file a second amended complaint in compliance with this Order. DONE and ORDERED in Orlando, Florida on December 17, 2025.

oi GAYLORD MOE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Copies furnished to:

Plaintiff, pro se