Peavley et al v. Chase Home Finance (MAG+)

Filing 25

ORDERED as follows: 1) The 23 Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED; 2) Dft's 3 Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, for More Definite Statement is DENIED; and 3) This case is REFERRED back to the Magistrate Judge for further proceedings on Plfs' claims. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 2/10/2012. (Attachments: # 1 Civil Appeals Checklist)(wcl, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
SOUTHERN DIVISION
RICHARD PEAVLEY and
SUSAN PEAVLEY,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiffs,
v.
CHASE HOME FINANCE,
Defendant.

CASE NO. 1:11-CV-368-WKW

ORDER
On January 26, 2012, the Magistrate Judge filed a Report and Recommendation
(Doc. # 23) regarding Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, for More
Definite Statement (Doc. # 3). No timely objections have been filed. Based upon an
independent review of the file in this case and upon CONSIDERATION of the
Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, it is ORDERED as follows:
1.

The Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 23) is ADOPTED;

2.

Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss, or in the Alternative, for More Definite

Statement (Doc. # 3) is DENIED; and
3.

This case is REFERRED back to the Magistrate Judge for further

proceedings on Plaintiffs’ claims.
DONE this 10th day of February, 2012.
/s/ W. Keith Watkins
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE