From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lowe v. Burlington Stores, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
Mar 29, 2017
No. 3:16-CV-03068-B-BF (N.D. Tex. Mar. 29, 2017)

Opinion

No. 3:16-CV-03068-B-BF

03-29-2017

SHERRI R. LOWE, Plaintiff, v. BURLINGTON STORES, INC., Defendant.


ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS , CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

The Court has under consideration the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Paul D. Stickney dated March 7, 2017. The Court has reviewed the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation for plain error. Finding none, the Court accepts the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Defendant's Partial Motion to Dismiss [ECF No. 7] is GRANTED. The Court dismisses Plaintiff's following claims: products liability; breach of implied warranty; breach of express warranty; breach of contract; battery; assault; and violations of the Deceptive Trade Practices Act. Defendant's Motion to Strike [ECF No. 24] is DENIED as moot. Plaintiff is ORDERED to file a response to the court's sua sponte motion for dismissal within 21 days from the date of entry of this order. Defendant is directed not to file a responsive brief unless ordered by the Court to do so. SO ORDERED, this 29th day of March, 2017.

/s/ _________

JANE J. BOYLE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Lowe v. Burlington Stores, Inc.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION
Mar 29, 2017
No. 3:16-CV-03068-B-BF (N.D. Tex. Mar. 29, 2017)
Case details for

Lowe v. Burlington Stores, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:SHERRI R. LOWE, Plaintiff, v. BURLINGTON STORES, INC., Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION

Date published: Mar 29, 2017

Citations

No. 3:16-CV-03068-B-BF (N.D. Tex. Mar. 29, 2017)

Citing Cases

Nghiem v. Sajib

Nghiem sued under the common law, not the DTPA. His common-law action for breach of the implied warranty is…