From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brown v. Wachovia Commercial Mortgage, Inc.

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Mar 15, 2006
04-CV-862-JE (D. Or. Mar. 15, 2006)

Opinion

04-CV-862-JE.

March 15, 2006

CHARLES R. MARKLEY, AARON M. WIGOD Greene Markley, P.C. Portland, OR, Attorneys for Plaintiff.

NINA COOK, LAURIE R. HAGER ROBERT L. CARLTON, Sussman Shank LLP Portland, OR, Attorneys for Defendant.


ORDER


Magistrate Judge John Jelderks issued Findings and Recommendation (#78) on December 15, 2005, in which he recommended the Court grant Defendant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (#54) as to Plaintiff's claims, deny Defendant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment(#54) as to Defendant's first counterclaim for declaratory relief, and deny Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (#59). Plaintiff filed timely objections to the Findings and Recommendation. The matter is now before this Court pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b).

When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). See also United States v. Bernhardt, 840 F.2d 1441, 1444 (9th Cir. 1988); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Business Machines, Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir. 1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920 (1982). Because the objecting party did not arrange for the transcription of the record pursuant to Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) nor did any party protest the lack of a transcript, the Court did not review a transcript or tape recording of the proceedings before the Magistrate Judge as part of the Court's de novo review. See Spaulding v. Univ. of Wash., 686 F.2d 1232, 1235 (9th Cir. 1982).

This Court has reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and does not find any error in the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation.

CONCLUSION

The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Jelderks's Findings and Recommendation (#78) as follows:

1. The Court DENIES Plaintiff's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (#59) and GRANTS Defendant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (#54) as to all of Plaintiff's claims. The Court, therefore, DISMISSES Plaintiff's claims with prejudice.
2. The Court DENIES Defendant's Motion for Partial Summary Judgment (#54) as to Defendant's first counterclaim for declaratory relief.
IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Brown v. Wachovia Commercial Mortgage, Inc.

United States District Court, D. Oregon
Mar 15, 2006
04-CV-862-JE (D. Or. Mar. 15, 2006)
Case details for

Brown v. Wachovia Commercial Mortgage, Inc.

Case Details

Full title:MILTON O. BROWN, Plaintiff, v. WACHOVIA COMMERCIAL MORTGAGE, INC., a New…

Court:United States District Court, D. Oregon

Date published: Mar 15, 2006

Citations

04-CV-862-JE (D. Or. Mar. 15, 2006)