KATHY GERHARDT v. HOBBY LOBBY STORES INC (2026)

DECISION AND ORDER

Plaintiff Kathy Gerhardt commenced this action against Defendant Hobby Lobby Stores, Inc. in New York state court on May 30, 2025, alleging claims surrounding a slip-and-fall accident while in the store, which she alleges caused her to sustain serious injury. See Dkt. 1-3. On January 9, 2026, this case was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Jeremiah J. McCarthy for all proceedings under 28 U.S.C. §§ 636(b)(1)(A), (B), and (C). Dkt. 5.

On December 23, 2025, Plaintiff responded to Defendant's demand for specific relief, stating that she demanded $500,000 in damages. Dkt. 11-11 at 3. On January 7, 2026, Defendant removed the case to federal court. Dkt. 1. On January 29, 2026, Plaintiff moved to remand and moved for costs and attorneys’ fees. Dkt. 7. Defendant opposed the motion to remand, Dkts. 11 and 12, and Plaintiff replied, Dkt. 13. On June 8, 2026, Judge McCarthy issued a Report and Recommendation (“R&R”), recommending that this Court grant Plaintiff's motion to remand and award Plaintiff costs and attorneys’ fees. See Dkt. 14. Neither party filed objections, and the time to do so has expired. See id. at 7 (stating that objections to the R&R were due on June 22, 2026).

A district court may accept, reject, or modify the findings or recommendations of a magistrate judge. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). A district court must conduct a de novo review of those portions of a magistrate judge's recommendation to which a party objects. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). But neither 28 U.S.C. § 636 nor Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72 requires a district court to review the recommendation of a magistrate judge to which no objections are raised. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149–50 (1985).

This Court carefully reviewed the R&R, the objections briefing, and the relevant record. Based on its de novo review, the Court plans to accept Judge McCarthy's recommendation to grant Plaintiff's motion to remand.

In the meantime, the case is referred back to Judge McCarthy consistent with the January 9, 2026 referral order to impose a briefing schedule for the request for costs and attorneys’ fees. See Dkt. 5. The remand will follow final resolution of the fees and costs issues.

SO ORDERED.

JOHN L. SINATRA, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE