From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Holloman v. White

United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Savannah Division
Oct 19, 2009
CASE NO. CV409-50 (S.D. Ga. Oct. 19, 2009)

Opinion

CASE NO. CV409-50.

October 19, 2009


ORDER


Before the Court is the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation (Doc. 3), to which objections have been filed (Doc. 5). After a careful de novo review, the Court concurs with the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation. Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation is ADOPTED as the Opinion of this Court. This case is DISMISSED. The Clerk of Court is DIRECTED to close this case.

Defendant's primary objection relies on the erroneous assertion that a grant of parole is equivalent to the vacation of prior conviction. (Doc. 5.) However, it is well-established under Georgia law that this is not the case. See Johnson v. Walls, 185 Ga. 177, 178, 194 S.E. 380, 382 (1937).

As this case is to be closed, all pending motions (Docs. 8, 9, 10) are DISMISSED AS MOOT.

SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Holloman v. White

United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Savannah Division
Oct 19, 2009
CASE NO. CV409-50 (S.D. Ga. Oct. 19, 2009)
Case details for

Holloman v. White

Case Details

Full title:GARY W. HOLLOMAN, Plaintiff, v. TERESA WHITE, ROLAND L. SHARPE, CHARLES P…

Court:United States District Court, S.D. Georgia, Savannah Division

Date published: Oct 19, 2009

Citations

CASE NO. CV409-50 (S.D. Ga. Oct. 19, 2009)

Citing Cases

Mallory S. S. Co. v. G. A. Bahn Diamond & Optical Co.

Matters of avoidance must be proven by the party pleading same. See Holloman v. White, 41 Tex. 61 . "The…

Huselby v. Allison

Moreover, appellant is inconsistent, in that he insists that Crow's title deraigned through the Federal Court…