govinfo:USCOURTS-flsd-1_24-cv-22770-3

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA 
 

 
TYREE JACKSON, as father and 
natural guardian of minor T.J., 
 
 Plaintiff, 
 
v. 
 
CARNIVAL CORPORATION, d/b/a 
CARNIVAL CRUISE LINE, 
 
 Defendant. 
 
 
 
ORDER 
 
THIS CAUSE comes before the Court on Defendant Carnival Corporation’s Limited 
Objections to Magistrate Judge Reid’s Order on Cross-Motions to Strike (the “Objections”). [ECF 
No. 193]. On May 5, 2026, Judge Reid issued an Order on Cross-Motions to Strike (the “Order”). 
[ECF No. 191]. In that Order, Judge Reid granted in part Plaintiff’s Motion to Strike the Opinion 
Testimony of Zdenek Hejzlar , [ECF No. 81] , and denied Defendant’s Motion to Strike the 
Untimely Disclosed Supplemental Opinions of Gerald Nielsen. [ECF No. 84]. Defendant objects 
to certain aspects of Jud ge Reid’s Order . [ECF No . 193]. Plaintiff responded to Defendant’s 
Objections. [ECF No. 194]. 
A party may file objections to a magistrate judge’s non -dispositive pretrial order. Upon 
review, the district court is required to consider the objections and must set aside any portion of 
the order found to be “clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a). A “finding is 
clearly erroneous when although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire 
evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” Holton 
______________________________/ 
Case 1:24-cv-22770-DPG Document 200 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/05/2026 Page 1 of 2
2 
 
v. City of Thomasville Sch. Dist ., 425 F.3d 1325, 1350–51 (11th Cir. 2005) (citation and internal 
quotation marks omitted). “A ruling is contrary to law if the magistrate judge has misinterpreted 
or misapplied applicable law.” Root ex. Rel. A.R. v. Dudek, 151 F. Supp. 3d 1309, 1312 (S.D. Fla. 
2015) (citation and internal quotation omitted). “In the absence of a legal error, a district court may 
reverse only if there was an abuse of discretion by the magistrate judge.” SEC v. Merkin , 283 
F.R.D. 699, 700 (S.D. Fla. 2012) (internal quotation omitted). 
After careful review, the Court finds that Judge Reid’s Order is neither clearly erroneous 
nor contrary to law. Accordingly, it is ORDERED and ADJUDGED as follows: 
1. Defendant’s Limited Objections to Magistrate Judge Reid’s Order on Cross -
Motions to Strike, [ECF No. 193], are OVERRULED. 
2. Judge Reid’s Order on Cross-Motions to Strike, [ECF No. 191], is AFFIRMED. 
3. The issues raised by Defendant’s request for clarification are best addressed at trial 
during the examination of Dr. Zdenek Hejzlar. 
DONE AND ORDERED in Chambers at Miami, Florida, this 5th day of June, 2026. 
 
 
________________________________ 
DARRIN P. GAYLES 
 UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 
 
 
Case 1:24-cv-22770-DPG Document 200 Entered on FLSD Docket 06/05/2026 Page 2 of 2

Passage view · GavelSight