From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Davis v. Seven Seventeen HB Philadelphia Corp.

United States District Court, M.D. North Carolina
Jun 20, 2003
CIVIL NO. 1:02CV00332 (M.D.N.C. Jun. 20, 2003)

Opinion

CIVIL NO. 1:02CV00332.

June 20, 2003.


ORDER


On June 3, 2003, the magistrate judge filed his recommendation in the above-entitled case and notices and copies of the recommendation were served on the parties on June 4, 2003. The notice provided, pursuant to Rule 72(b), Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, that any objections to the recommendation must be filed within ten days. Plaintiff has not filed any objections to the magistrate judge's recommendation. The court, therefore, need not make a de novo review of the magistrate judge's recommendation. The court hereby adopts the magistrate judge's recommendation.

NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED that Defendants' motion [Doc. #44] for summary judgment is GRANTED, and this action is DISMISSED with prejudice.


Summaries of

Davis v. Seven Seventeen HB Philadelphia Corp.

United States District Court, M.D. North Carolina
Jun 20, 2003
CIVIL NO. 1:02CV00332 (M.D.N.C. Jun. 20, 2003)
Case details for

Davis v. Seven Seventeen HB Philadelphia Corp.

Case Details

Full title:MONA WILSON DAVIS, Plaintiff, v. SEVEN SEVENTEEN HB PHILADELPHIA CORP. NO…

Court:United States District Court, M.D. North Carolina

Date published: Jun 20, 2003

Citations

CIVIL NO. 1:02CV00332 (M.D.N.C. Jun. 20, 2003)

Citing Cases

Clement v. Satterfield

Denial that misconduct occurs, or claim that the reported events did not, in fact, occur is not material to…

Azimi v. Jordan's Meats, Inc.

See Plaintiff's Additional SMF ¶ 42; Azimi Dep. at 249-64. Such a denial does not, in itself, tend to show…