From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Wells v. Kearney

United States District Court, D. Arizona
Sep 3, 2009
No. CV 07-309-TUC-FRZ (D. Ariz. Sep. 3, 2009)

Opinion

No. CV 07-309-TUC-FRZ.

September 3, 2009


ORDER


Pending before the Court is a Report and Recommendation issued by United States Magistrate Judge Jacqueline Marshall whereby she recommends granting several motions to dismiss and addresses several other motions.

The Report and Recommendation was issued on August 11, 2009. The parties have not filed any objections to the Report and Recommendation, the time for filing objections expired, and the Court will not consider any untimely objections.

The Report and Recommendation was mailed to Plaintiff and others not signed up for CM/ECF on August 12, 2009.

The Court has reviewed the entire record and concludes that Magistrate Judge Marshall's recommendations are not clearly erroneous. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72; Johnson v. Zema Systems Corp., 170 F.3d 734, 739 (7th Cir. 1999); Conley v. Crabtree, 14 F. Supp. 2d 1203, 1204 (D. Or. 1998).

Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED as follows:

(1) United States Magistrate Judge Marshall's Report and Recommendation (Doc. #101) is ACCEPTED AND ADOPTED.

(2) The motions to dismiss filed by the defendants (Doc. #'s 46, 60, 62, 63, 68, 69) are granted; these defendants are dismissed with prejudice and the Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment accordingly.

(3) Defendant Broad and Cassel's and Defendant Kevin Kinghorn's motions for summary disposition (Doc. #'s 95, 97) are granted.

(4) Plaintiff's motion for an extension of time to respond (Doc. #96) is denied.

(5) Plaintiff is ordered to show cause as to why Defendant John Knox Village's motion for sanctions (Doc. #86) and Defendant Broad and Cassel's motion for sanctions (Doc. #94) should not be granted. Plaintiff shall show cause by filing a brief addressing the sanctions issues no later than September 18, 2009.

(6) This case is hereby referred back to Magistrate Judge Jacqueline J. Marshall for all pretrial proceedings and report and recommendation in accordance with the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1), Fed.R.Civ.P. 72, and LRCiv 72.1, 72.2, and 72.3 of Rules of Practice of the United States District Court for the District of Arizona.

All future filings in this case shall be designated:

CV 07-309-TUC-FRZ (JJM)


Summaries of

Wells v. Kearney

United States District Court, D. Arizona
Sep 3, 2009
No. CV 07-309-TUC-FRZ (D. Ariz. Sep. 3, 2009)
Case details for

Wells v. Kearney

Case Details

Full title:Cheryl Wells, Plaintiff, v. Hon. Jan E. Kearney, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, D. Arizona

Date published: Sep 3, 2009

Citations

No. CV 07-309-TUC-FRZ (D. Ariz. Sep. 3, 2009)