From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kinney v. Anglin

United States District Court, C.D. Illinois
May 19, 2011
Case No. 10-CV-2238 (C.D. Ill. May. 19, 2011)

Opinion

Case No. 10-CV-2238.

May 19, 2011


ORDER


A Report and Recommendation (#20) was filed by the Magistrate Judge in the above cause on April 25, 2011. More than fourteen (14) days have elapsed since the filing of the Recommendation and no objections have been made. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is, therefore, accepted by the court. See Video Views, Inc. v. Studio 21, Ltd, 797 F.2d 538 (7th Cir. 1986).

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:

(1) The Report and Recommendation (#20) is accepted by this court.

(2) The Rule 12(b)(6) Motion to Dismiss Counts I and III (#12) filed by Defendants is DENIED in part and GRANTED in part. The Motion to Dismiss is DENIED as to Count I. The Motion to Dismiss is GRANTED as to Count III. Count III is dismissed as to all Defendants except Defendant Keith Anglin. Further, as agreed to by the parties, Defendant Michael Randle is dismissed from this suit in its entirety.

(3) This case is referred to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings.


Summaries of

Kinney v. Anglin

United States District Court, C.D. Illinois
May 19, 2011
Case No. 10-CV-2238 (C.D. Ill. May. 19, 2011)
Case details for

Kinney v. Anglin

Case Details

Full title:VICCI KINNEY, Plaintiff, v. KEITH ANGLIN, et al., Defendants

Court:United States District Court, C.D. Illinois

Date published: May 19, 2011

Citations

Case No. 10-CV-2238 (C.D. Ill. May. 19, 2011)

Citing Cases

Hagan v. Quinn

However, several courts have distinguished Sonnleitner. In Kinney v. Anglin, 2011 WL 1899345, *7…

Driftless Area Land Conservancy v. Pub. Serv. Comm'n

Other courts interpreting Sonnleitner have found this fact to be significant. See, e.g., Nelson v. Univ. of…