Opinion
Civil Action No. 11-cv-02141-PAB-MEH
02-27-2013
BOND SAFEGUARD INSURANCE COMPANY, Plaintiff, v. MORLEY COMPANIES FAMILY DEVELOPMENT, LLLP a/k/a Morley Family Development, LLLP, a/k/a Morley Companies Family Development, a/k/a Morley Family Development, a/k/a Morley Companies Family Development, LLP, a/k/a Morley Family Development, LLP, a/k/a Morley Companies Family Development, LLC, a/k/a Morley Companies, ROBIN L. MORLEY, a/k/a Robin Morley, and JIM MORLEY, a/k/a James Morley, a/k/a James F. Morley, Defendants.
Judge Philip A. Brimmer
ORDER ACCEPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S RECOMMENDATION
This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Michael E. Hegarty filed on February 4, 2013 [Docket No. 134]. Pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), objections to the Recommendation must be filed within fourteen days after its service on the parties. The Recommendation was served on February 4, 2013. No party has objected to the Recommendation.
In the absence of an objection, the district court may review a magistrate judge's recommendation under any standard it deems appropriate. See Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) ("[i]t does not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate's factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings"). In this matter, the Court has reviewed the Recommendation to satisfy itself that there is "no clear error on the face of the record." Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), Advisory Committee Notes. Based on this review, the Court has concluded that the Recommendation is a correct application of the facts and the law. Accordingly, it is
This standard of review is something less than a "clearly erroneous or contrary to law" standard of review, Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a), which in turn is less than a de novo review. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
ORDERED as follows:
1. The Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [Docket No. 134] is ACCEPTED.
2. Plaintiff's Renewed Motion (Now Unopposed) for Order Requiring Garnishee to Pay Funds Into the Court and Directing Clerk to Disburse Funds to Judment [sic] Creditor [Docket No. 128] is GRANTED.
3. The Clerk of the Court shall enter judgment in favor of James Morley in the amount of $79.64 and in favor of Robin Morley in the amount of $3,247.87 against Stockmens Bank.
4. Stockmens Bank shall deposit such sums into the registry of the Court.
5. Upon Stockmens Bank's deposit of such sums, the Clerk of the Court shall promptly disburse said funds to plaintiff's counsel (Jerome M. Joseph, Godin & Baity, LLC, 1050 17th Street, #1610, Denver, CO 80265) on behalf of plaintiff.
BY THE COURT:
________________________
PHILIP A. BRIMMER
United States District Judge