Landrum v. Anderson

Full title: LAWRENCE LANDRUM, Petitioner, v. CARL S. ANDERSON, Warden, Respondent

Court: United States District Court, S.D. Ohio, Western Division at Dayton

Date published: Aug 10, 2006

Case No. 1-:96-CV-641 (S.D. Ohio Aug. 10, 2006)

Opinion

Case No. 1-:96-CV-641.

August 10, 2006

ENTRY AND ORDER OVERRULING RESPONDENT ANDERSON'S OBJECTIONS AND APPEAL (Doc. #218) FROM THE CHIEF MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS (Doc. #205) AND ADOPTING THE CHIEF MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS IN ITS ENTIRETY

THOMAS ROSE, District Judge

This matter is before the Court pursuant to Respondent Anderson's Objections To and Appeal From the Chief Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation That Respondent's Motion To Alter or Amend Should Be Denied. (Doc. #218.) Petitioner Lawrence Landrum filed a Memorandum Contra. (Doc. #221.) Therefore, Respondent's objections are ripe for decision.

As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the District Judge has made a de novo review of the record in this case. Upon said review, the Court finds that Respondent Anderson's objections to the Chief Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations are not well taken and they are hereby OVERRULED. Accordingly, the Chief Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendations is ADOPTED in its entirety. Respondent Anderson's Motion To Amend is OVERRULED.

DONE and ORDERED.