From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thomas v. Lake Cnty.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION
Jan 12, 2015
No. 1:13-cv-852-CL (D. Or. Jan. 12, 2015)

Opinion

No. 1:13-cv-852-CL

01-12-2015

TERESA THOMAS, Plaintiff, v. LAKE COUNTY, Defendant.


ORDER

:

Magistrate Judge Mark D. Clarke filed a Report and Recommendation, and- the matter is now before this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Although no objections have been filed, this court reviews legal principles de novo. See Lorin Corp. v Goto & Co., Ltd., 700 F.2d 1202, 1206 (8th Cir. 1983).

After review, I agree with the Report and Recommendation that Defendant's motion for summary judgment should be granted.

CONCLUSION

Magistrate Judge Clarke's Report and Recommendation (#53) is adopted. Defendant's motion for summary judgment (#26) is granted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 12 day of January, 2015.

/s/_________

OWEN M. PANNER

U.S. DISTRICT JUDGE


Summaries of

Thomas v. Lake Cnty.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION
Jan 12, 2015
No. 1:13-cv-852-CL (D. Or. Jan. 12, 2015)
Case details for

Thomas v. Lake Cnty.

Case Details

Full title:TERESA THOMAS, Plaintiff, v. LAKE COUNTY, Defendant.

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON MEDFORD DIVISION

Date published: Jan 12, 2015

Citations

No. 1:13-cv-852-CL (D. Or. Jan. 12, 2015)

Citing Cases

Fontaine v. MCRT Res.

Sandberg v. City of N. Plains, No. 3:10-cv-01273-HZ, 2012 WL 602434, at *6 (D. Or. Feb. 22, 2012); see also…