Pearson, et al. v. Filmore, et al. (MAG+)
ORDER directing as follows: (1) plfs' 6 objection is OVERRULED; (2) the 5 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION is ADOPTED; (3) plf's complaint is DISMISSED pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii); (4) plf's 2 Motion for Leave to Proceed in forma pauperis is GRANTED; and (5) plf's 4 Motion to Amend complaint is DENIED. Signed by Chief Judge William Keith Watkins on 10/5/15. (djy, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF ALABAMA
LORENZO PEARSON and
BILL FILMORE and THE
COMMERCIAL BANK OF
CASE NO. 1:15-CV-79-WKW
On August 12, 2015, the Magistrate Judge filed a Recommendation (Doc.
# 5) to which Plaintiffs object (Doc. # 6). Based upon an independent and de novo
review of those portions of the Recommendation to which objection is made, see
28 U.S.C. § 636(b), it is ORDERED as follows:
Plaintiffs’ objection (Doc. # 6) is OVERRULED;
The Recommendation (Doc. # 5) is ADOPTED;
Plaintiffs’ complaint is DISMISSED pursuant to the provisions of 28
U.S.C. § 1915(e)(2)(B)(i) and (ii);
Plaintiffs’ motion for leave to proceed in forma pauperis (Doc. # 2) is
Plaintiffs’ motion to amend (Doc. # 4) their complaint is DENIED.
DONE this 5th day of October, 2015.
/s/ W. Keith Watkins
CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?