Menu

Timely and Specific: Making Objections to Federal Magistrate Reports

Appellate & Trial Support   |   Litigation and Trials   |   October 3, 2018
Download   
Share Page
Preservation of Error Tips

Although it might be obvious to attorneys who routinely practice in the federal courts, for those who do not, it is important that specific and timely objections to a federal magistrate’s report and recommendation are filed to preserve review of those arguments by both the district and appellate court. Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72 and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) provide that such written objections are to be filed and served within 14 days after service of a copy of the recommended disposition. The district court then conducts a de novo review of any portion of the report and recommendation that has been properly objected to. See id.

What constitutes a “proper objection”? As one district court in Michigan recently observed, “it is not the job of the Court to make arguments on [a party’s] behalf” –  parties cannot simply make an “argument in the most skeletal way, leaving the court to … put flesh on its bones.” Sands v. Brennan, 2018 WL 4356650, at *2 (E.D. Mich. Sept. 13, 2018) (quoting McPherson v. Kelsey, 125 F.3d 989, 995–96 (6th Cir. 1997)). Objections “must specifically identify” – indeed, “pinpoint” – those “specific findings that the party disagrees with.” Leatherwood v. Anna’s Linens Co., 384 F. App’x 853, 856–57 (11th Cir. 2010). If an objection is not specific enough, the district court may apply a clear error instead of de novo standard of review or, as noted in Sands, the objection may be waived altogether.

Moreover, the failure to properly file objections to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation has a significant impact on appellate rights as well. In the absence of plain error or manifest justice, a party who fails to object in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) waives her right to challenge on appeal the district court’s order on unobjected-to factual and legal conclusions. 11th Cir. R. 3-1. This rule does come with a notable caveat: in order to waive such a challenge, the party must have been “informed of the time period for objecting and the consequences on appeal for failing to object.” Id. But because such a warning often comes standard in a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation, an attorney should always file timely, specific, and legally-supported objections in order to preserve her arguments.

Preservation Issue:

Be sure to timely file specific objections to a federal magistrate judge’s report, pinpointing the specific findings with which you disagree.


©2019 Carlton Fields, P.A. Carlton Fields practices law in California through Carlton Fields, LLP. Carlton Fields publications should not be construed as legal advice on any specific facts or circumstances. The contents are intended for general information and educational purposes only, and should not be relied on as if it were advice about a particular fact situation. The distribution of this publication is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship with Carlton Fields. This publication may not be quoted or referred to in any other publication or proceeding without the prior written consent of the firm, to be given or withheld at our discretion. To request reprint permission for any of our publications, please use our Contact Us form via the link below. The views set forth herein are the personal views of the author and do not necessarily reflect those of the firm. This site may contain hypertext links to information created and maintained by other entities. Carlton Fields does not control or guarantee the accuracy or completeness of this outside information, nor is the inclusion of a link to be intended as an endorsement of those outside sites.

Subscribe to Publications

Disclaimer

The information on this website is presented as a service for our clients and Internet users and is not intended to be legal advice, nor should you consider it as such. Although we welcome your inquiries, please keep in mind that merely contacting us will not establish an attorney-client relationship between us. Consequently, you should not convey any confidential information to us until a formal attorney-client relationship has been established. Please remember that electronic correspondence on the internet is not secure and that you should not include sensitive or confidential information in messages. With that in mind, we look forward to hearing from you.