From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Mitan v. Davis

United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky, at Louisville
Sep 13, 2010
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:08CV-117-S (W.D. Ky. Sep. 13, 2010)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:08CV-117-S.

September 13, 2010


ORDER


This matter is before the court for consideration of the August 2, 2010 Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (DN 56) regarding plaintiffs' failure to prosecute their claims.

Plaintiff Keith Mitan filed several objections to the Report and Recommendation. Having conducted a de novo review of the Magistrate Judge's Findings of Fact and Conclusions of Law as required by 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1), the court finds no error with the Magistrate Judge's conclusion that the absence of any discovery or other substantive progress in this case warrants dismissal of the claims of Frank Mitan, Kenneth Mitan, and Keith Mitan for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

The court also adopts the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation that the claims of Teresa Mitan be dismissed voluntarily, with prejudice, and that the defendants' counterclaim be dismissed voluntarily, without prejudice.

It is HEREBY ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that:

1. The August 2, 2010 Finds of Fact, Conclusions of Law, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (DN 54) are ACCEPTED AND ADOPTED IN THEIR ENTIRETY.

2. The claims of Keith Mitan, Kenneth Mitan, and Frank Mitan in this matter are DISMISSED for failure to prosecute pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b).

3. The claims of Teresa Mitan are voluntarily DISMISSED, with prejudice.

3. Defendants' counterclaim is voluntarily DISMISSED, without prejudice.

There being no just reason for delay in its entry, this is a final order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

September 10, 2010


Summaries of

Mitan v. Davis

United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky, at Louisville
Sep 13, 2010
CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:08CV-117-S (W.D. Ky. Sep. 13, 2010)
Case details for

Mitan v. Davis

Case Details

Full title:KENNETH MITAN, et al. PLAINTIFFS v. EMORY DAVIS, et al. DEFENDANTS

Court:United States District Court, W.D. Kentucky, at Louisville

Date published: Sep 13, 2010

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 3:08CV-117-S (W.D. Ky. Sep. 13, 2010)

Citing Cases

Harris v. Unique Auto., Inc.

On the one hand, many courts, including this one, have applied a de novo standard of review to Rule 41(b)…