From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Peck v. Washoe Cnty.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Nov 2, 2012
3:09-cv-00381-LRH-VPC (D. Nev. Nov. 2, 2012)

Opinion

3:09-cv-00381-LRH-VPC

11-02-2012

RANK M. PECK, Plaintiff, v. WASHOE COUNTY; et al., Defendants.


ORDER

Before the court is Plaintiff's Objections to Magistrate Judge's Ruling (#90), which the court will treat as a motion to reconsider Magistrate's Order (#83). Defendant filed a Response to Objection to Magistrate Judge's Rulings (#91).

Refers to this court's docket number.

The Court has conducted its review in this case, has fully considered the parties' pleadings, and other relevant matters of record pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b) (1), and concludes that the Magistrate Judge's ruling was neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law.

The Magistrate Judge's Order (#83) will, therefore, be sustained and Plaintiff's motion (#90) is DENIED.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

_______________

LARRY R. HICKS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Peck v. Washoe Cnty.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA
Nov 2, 2012
3:09-cv-00381-LRH-VPC (D. Nev. Nov. 2, 2012)
Case details for

Peck v. Washoe Cnty.

Case Details

Full title:RANK M. PECK, Plaintiff, v. WASHOE COUNTY; et al., Defendants.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF NEVADA

Date published: Nov 2, 2012

Citations

3:09-cv-00381-LRH-VPC (D. Nev. Nov. 2, 2012)