From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Pederson v. Klamath Cnty.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION
Oct 1, 2014
No. 1:12-cv-725-CL (D. Or. Oct. 1, 2014)

Opinion

No. 1:12-cv-725-CL

10-01-2014

CARLA PEDERSON, Plaintiff, v. KLAMATH COUNTY, et al., Defendants.


ORDER

:

Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke filed a Report and Recommendation, and the matter is now before this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Because Plaintiff objects to the Report and Recommendation, I have reviewed this matter de novo. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Bus. Mach., Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981). I agree with the Report and Recommendation that Defendants are entitled to summary judgment.'.

CONCLUSION

Magistrate Judge Clarke's Report and Recommendation (#55) is adopted. Defendants' motion for summary judgment (#37) is granted. Plaintiff's motion for partial summary judgment (#39) is denied.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 1 day of October, 2014.

/s/_________

OWEN M. PANNER

U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Pederson v. Klamath Cnty.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION
Oct 1, 2014
No. 1:12-cv-725-CL (D. Or. Oct. 1, 2014)
Case details for

Pederson v. Klamath Cnty.

Case Details

Full title:CARLA PEDERSON, Plaintiff, v. KLAMATH COUNTY, et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION

Date published: Oct 1, 2014

Citations

No. 1:12-cv-725-CL (D. Or. Oct. 1, 2014)