Wiand v. Clark Asset Management Co.

District Court, M.D. Florida·Decided April 17, 2023·No. 8:22-cv-01512·Unknown

Opinion

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION BURTON W. WIAND as Receiver for OASIS INTERNATIONAL GROUP, LTD. OASIS MANAGEMENT, LLC, and SATELLITE HOLDING COMPANY, Plaintiff,

v. Case No. 8:22-cv-1512-KKM-TGW CLARK ASSET MANAGEMENT and DOUGLAS B. CLARK, Defendants.

ORDER Plaintiff, Burton W. Wiand, as receiver for Oasis International Group, Ltd., Oasis Management, LLC, and Satellite Holding Company, moves for default judgment against Defendants Clark Asset Management and Douglas B. Clark. Mot. for Default J. (Doc. 17). The Magistrate Judge recommends that the Court grant the motion on Counts I and III and deny it as moot on Count IT. R. & R. (Doc. 18). After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject, or modify a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). Ifa party files a timely and specific objection

to a finding of fact by the magistrate judge, the district court must conduct a de novo review with respect to that factual issue. Stokes v. Singletary, 952 F.2d 1567, 1576 (11th Cir. 1992). The fourteen-day deadline for objections to the Report and Recommendation has passed. No one objects. Nevertheless, the Court reviews legal conclusions de novo, even in the absence of an objection. See Cooper-Houston v. S. Ry. Co., 37 F.3d 603, 604 (11th Cir. 1994); Ashworth v. Glades Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Comm'rs, 379 F. Supp. 3d 1244, 1246 (M.D. Fla. 2019). After a review, the Court concludes that default judgment against both defendants on Counts I and III is appropriate for the reasons the Magistrate Judge stated, and denied as moot on Count II. See R. & R. Accordingly, the following is ORDERED: 1. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (Doc. 18) is ADOPTED and made a part of this Order for all purposes. 2. Plaintiffs Motion for Default Judgment (Doc. 17) is GRANTED in part. 3. The Clerk is directed to ENTER JUDGMENT against Defendants on Counts I and III in the amount of $146,092.90 plus pre-judgment interest from November 1, 2022, in accordance with the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. 4, The Clerk is further directed to TERMINATE all pending motions and

deadlines, and CLOSE this case. ORDERED in Tampa, Florida, on April 17, 2023.

pater. 4 Mizelle : United States District Judge

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

Wiand v. Clark Asset Management Co., (M.D. Fla. 2023).

Wiand v. Clark Asset Management Co. (Wiand v. Clark Asset Management Co.) — published by Counsel Stack Legal Research, free access to 12M+ legal documents.

Related

Marina Cooper-Houston v. Southern Railway Company
37 F.3d 603 (Eleventh Circuit, 1994)
Ashworth v. Glades Cnty. Bd. of Cnty. Commissioners
379 F. Supp. 3d 1244 (M.D. Florida, 2019)
Stokes v. Singletary
952 F.2d 1567 (Eleventh Circuit, 1992)