YOUNG v. WCTV NEWS CHANNEL

• Court: District Court, N.D. Florida
• Decided: July 14, 2025
• Docket: 4:24-cv-00161
• Status: Unknown

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TALLAHASSEE DIVISION

DA’VHON YOUNG

Plaintiff, v. Case No.: 4:24cv161-MW/MAF

WCTV NEWS CHANNEL,

Defendant. _________________________/

ORDER ACCEPTING IN PART AND REJECTING IN PART REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

This Court has considered, without hearing, the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, ECF No. 33, and has also reviewed de novo Plaintiff’s objections, ECF No. 36, and Defendant’s response to Plaintiff’s objections, ECF No. 37. This Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge that the Plaintiff’s case should be dismissed for failure to satisfy Florida’s pre-suit notice requirement for defamation claims and adopts the report and recommendation on this basis. As to whether Plaintiff’s claims are also due to be dismissed on the merits, this Court rejects the report and recommendation. As to whether Defendant’s news story was substantially true, this Court need not parse whether being accused of a murder charge, generally, is substantially the same as being accused of a school shooting, given Plaintiff’s failure to satisfy the pre-suit notice requirement. And, insofar as the Magistrate Judge reports that the Plaintiff’s claim fails because he is a “libel-proof plaintiff,” the Magistrate Judge does not address the fact that the Florida Supreme Court has not adopted the “libel-proof plaintiff” doctrine in Florida and

does not explore the attendant analysis as to whether this Court should apply this doctrine in this case. See, e.g., Davis v. McKenzie, 201 WL 8809359, at 15 (S.D. Fla. Nov. 3, 2017) (citing Guideone Elite Ins. Co. v. Old Cutler Presbyterian Church,

Inc., 420 F.3d 1317, 1326 n.5 (11th Cir. 2005)). Accordingly, IT IS ORDERED: The report and recommendation, ECF No. 33, is accepted in part and

rejected in part, over the Plaintiff’s objections, as this Court’s opinion. This Court accepts the recommendation that this case be dismissed for Plaintiff’s failure to satisfy the pre-suit notice requirement. Defendant’s motion to dismiss, ECF No. 24,

is GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. The motion is GRANTED in part with respect to Plaintiff’s failure to satisfy the pre-suit notice requirement. The balance of the motion, ECF No. 24, is DENIED, and the balance of the report and recommendation is REJECTED.

The Clerk shall enter judgment stating, “Plaintiff’s complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice for failure to satisfy Florida’s pre-suit notice requirement.” The Clerk shall note on the docket that this case is dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(ii) and close the file.

SO ORDERED on July 14, 2025.

s/Mark E. Walker ____ United States District Judge