United States of America v. Cullinan

Middle District of Florida, flmd-8:2016-mc-00039

ORDER: The Report and Recommendation (Doc. # {{6}}) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. The Court hereby GRANTS the Motion to Comply with Internal Revenue Service Summons (Doc. # {{5}}). Respondent is directed to comply with the Internal Revenue Service Summons served on Respondent on July 23, 2015, a copy of which is attached to the Petition to Enforce Internal Revenue Service Summons (Doc. # 1-2). Specifically, Respondent is ordered to appear before the designated Revenue Officer or his designee, at such time and place as may hereafter be fixed by the Revenue Officer, to give testimony and produce for examination and copying the books, records, papers, and other data as demanded by the summons. Signed by Judge Virginia M. Hernandez Covington on 8/8/2016. (DMD)

Interested in this case?

Current View

Full Text

PageID 25 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT MIDDLE DISTRICT OF FLORIDA TAMPA DIVISION UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Petitioner, v. Case No. 8:16-mc-39-T-33JSS RICHARD E. CULLINAN, Respondent. --------------------------------/ ORDER This matter is before the Court on consideration of United States Magistrate Judge Julie S. Sneed's Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 6), filed on July 19, 2016, recommending that the Government's Motion to Comply with Internal Revenue Service Summons (Doc. # 5) be granted. Respondent has not filed an objection to the Report and Recommendation, and the time for Respondent to do so has expired. See La Mura v. United States, 765 F.2d 974, 979-80 (11th Cir. 1985)(stating that after the government meets its burden of proof, "the burden shifts to the party contesting the summons to disprove one of the four elements of the government's prima facie showing or convince the court that enforcement of the summons would constitute an abuse of the court's process"). After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings and recommendations, a district judge may accept, reject or modify the magistrate judge's report and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 1 PageID 26 636(b)(1); Williams v. Wainwright, 681 F.2d 732 (11th Cir. 1982), cert. denied, 459 U.S. 1112 (1983). In the absence of specific objections, there is no requirement that a district judge review factual findings de novo, Garvey v. Vaughn, 993 F.2d 776, 779 n.9 (11th Cir. 1993), and the court may accept, reject or modify, in whole or in part, the findings and recommendation. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The district judge 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); Castro Bobadilla v. Reno, 826 F. Supp. 1428, 1431-32 (S.D. Fla. 1993), aff'd, 28 F.3d 116 (11th Cir. 1994). After conducting a careful and complete review of the findings, conclusions and recommendations, and giving de novo review to matters of law, the Court accepts the factual findings and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge. Accordingly, it is now ORDERED, ADJUDGED, and DECREED: (1) The Report and Recommendation (Doc. # 6) is ACCEPTED and ADOPTED. (2) The Court hereby GRANTS the Motion to Comply with Internal Revenue Service Summons (Doc. # 5). (3) Respondent is directed to comply with the Internal Revenue Service Summons served on Respondent on July 23, 2015, a copy of which is attached to the Petition to Enforce Internal Revenue Service Summons (Doc. # 1-2). Specifically, Respondent is ordered to appear before the designated Revenue 2 PageID 27 Officer or his designee, at such time and place as may hereafter be fixed by the Revenue Officer, to give testimony and produce for examination and copying the books, records, papers, and other data as demanded by the summons. DONE and ORDERED in Chambers in Tampa, Florida, this 8th day of August 2016. 3