From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Guth v. Wolf

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION
Oct 3, 2017
CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:17-CV-1100 (S.D. Tex. Oct. 3, 2017)

Opinion

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:17-CV-1100

10-03-2017

THOMAS GUTH, et al, Plaintiffs, v. MICHAEL WOLF, et al, Defendants.


ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION

The Court has reviewed the Memorandum and Recommendation (Instrument No. 24) signed by Magistrate Judge Mary Milloy on September 15, 2017 regarding Instrument No. 14. Plaintiff timely filed objections. The Court has reviewed the Memorandum and Recommendation and objections and made a de novo review of the Magistrate Judge's recommended dispositions to which objections were raised, Rule 72(b), Fed. R. Civ. P.; 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); McLeod, Alexander, Powel & Apffel P.C. v. Quarks, 925 F.2d 853, 855 (5th Cir. 1991), and after consideration of the applicable law, is of the opinion that said Memorandum and Recommendation should be adopted by this Court. It is therefore

ORDERED, ADJUDGED and DECREED that United States Magistrate Judge Milloy's Memorandum and Recommendation is hereby adopted by this Court.

The Clerk shall enter this Order and provide all parties with a true copy.

SIGNED on this the 3rd day of October, 2017, at Houston, Texas.

/s/ _________

VANESSA D. GILMORE

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Guth v. Wolf

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION
Oct 3, 2017
CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:17-CV-1100 (S.D. Tex. Oct. 3, 2017)
Case details for

Guth v. Wolf

Case Details

Full title:THOMAS GUTH, et al, Plaintiffs, v. MICHAEL WOLF, et al, Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION

Date published: Oct 3, 2017

Citations

CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:17-CV-1100 (S.D. Tex. Oct. 3, 2017)