AMICUS AI
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges
Are you a practicing lawyer?
Enhance your digital presence and reach by creating a Casemine profile.
Upload pleading to use the new AI search
Cites
Cited by
Citation Codes
Equivalent Citations
citation codes
Docket Number
Judges

KATHERINE MARTINEZ, Plaintiff, v. GEICO CASUALTY INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant.

KATHLEEN M. WILLIAMS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

ORDER

KATHLEEN M. WILLIAMS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

THIS MATTER is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Lisette M. Reid's Report and Recommendation (DE 62) (“Report”) on Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (DE 18) (“Motion”). In the Report, Magistrate Judge Reid recommends that the Court grant Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment. (DE 62 at 1.) Specifically, the Report finds that “even considering the totality of circumstances in a light most favorable to Plaintiff. .[Defendant] GEICO did not, as a matter of law, act in bad faith.” (Id. at 21.) Plaintiff filed Objections to the Report (DE 67) and Defendant filed a Response (DE 71). The Court conducted a de novo review of the portions of the Report to which Plaintiff objected and a review of the remainder of the Report for clear error.

Having carefully reviewed the Report, the Objections, and having considered the extensive record and the applicable law, it is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:

1. The Report and Recommendation (DE 62) is AFFIRMED AND ADOPTED.

2. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (DE 18) is GRANTED.

3. All deadlines and hearings are CANCELLED. All pending motions are DENIED AS MOOT.

4. Judgement in favor of Defendant will be entered by way of a separate Order.

DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers in Miami, Florida, on this 1st day of February, 2024.

Use AI to get other relevant cases.

Comments

Martinez v. Geico Cas. Ins. Co.
(Feb 1, 2024)