Opinion
Civil Action 1:19-CV-041
04-04-2022
MADHAVAN PISHARODI, Plaintiff, v. WELLS FARGO BANK, N.A., Defendant.
ORDER
FERNANDO RODRIGUEZ, JR. UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
In 2009, Plaintiff Dr. Madhavan Pisharodi signed a lease agreement for a safe deposit box with Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. (Petition, Doc. 1-4, 6) Dr. Pisharodi alleges that he stored gold and jewelry with an estimated value of $897,412, .60, and that the items remained there when he accessed the box in August 2013. (Id. at 7) He did not access the box again until April 2017, when he discovered that it was empty. (Id.)
In February 2019, Dr. Pisharodi filed suit against Wells Fargo, alleging breach of contract, civil conversion, negligence, and violations of the Texas Deceptive Trade Practices Consumer Protection Act in relation to the missing items from his safe deposit box. (Id. at 8-11) In December 2021, Wells Fargo moved for summary judgment as to all of Pisharodi's causes of action. (Motion, Doc. 31)
A United States Magistrate Judge recommends that Wells Fargo's Motion for Summary Judgment be granted because Dr. Pisharodi has failed to show a genuine dispute of material fact as to any of his causes of action. (Amended R&R, Doc. 35) Dr. Pisharodi timely filed objections. (Doc. 36) As a result, the Court conducts a de novo review of the challenged portions of the Report and Recommendation. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(3).
Based on the record and the applicable law, the Court finds that the Report and Recommendation correctly applies the law to Wells Fargo's Motion for Summary Judgment.
As a result, the Court OVERRULES Dr. Pisharodi's objections and ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (Doc. 35). It is:
ORDERED that Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 20) is GRANTED; and
ORDERED that all of Plaintiff Dr. Madhavan Pisharodi's causes of action against Defendant Wells Fargo Bank, N.A. are DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
The Court will issue a Final Judgment in accordance with this Order.