Fiechtner v. American Family Mutual Insurance Company

Filing 221

ORDER. The magistrate judges Recommendation 96 filed 10/19/2010 is APPROVED AND ADOPTED as an order of this court. The objections stated in Plaintiffs Objection to Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge 138 filed 11/05/2010, are OVER RULED. Plaintiffs Motion To Amend Scheduling Order and for Leave To File Amended Complaint To Assert Class Action Claims and Punitive Damages 34 (sealed entry 25 ), filed 08/30/2010, is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART. By Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 12/07/2010.(sah, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Robert E. Blackburn Civil Case No. 09-cv-02681-REB-MEH DAWNMARIE FIECHTNER, Plaintiffs, v. AMERICAN FAMILY MUTUAL INSURANCE COMPANY, Defendant. ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS TO AND ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE Blackburn, J. The matters before me are (1) the magistrate judge's Recommendation [#96] filed October 19, 2010; and (2) Plaintiff's Objection to Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge [#138] filed November 5, 2010. I overrule the objections, adopt the recommendation, and grant the motion for leave to amend the complaint in part and deny it is part as follows. As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), I have reviewed de novo all portions of the recommendation to which objections have been filed, and have considered carefully the recommendation, objections, and applicable caselaw. The recommendation is detailed and well-reasoned. Contrastingly, plaintiff's objections are imponderous and without merit. Therefore, I find and conclude that the arguments advanced, authorities cited, and findings of fact, conclusions of law, and recommendation proposed by the magistrate judge should be approved and adopted.

THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows: 1. That the magistrate judge's Recommendation [#96] filed October 19, 2010, is APPROVED AND ADOPTED as an order of this court; 2. That the objections stated in Plaintiff's Objection to Recommendations of United States Magistrate Judge [#138] filed November 5, 2010, are OVERRULED; and 3. That Plaintiff's Motion To Amend Scheduling Order and for Leave To File Amended Complaint To Assert Class Action Claims and Punitive Damages [#34] (sealed entry [#25]), filed August 30, 2010, is GRANTED IN PART and DENIED IN PART: a. That the motion is GRANTED insofar as plaintiff seeks leave to amend her complaint to add a claim for punitive damages; and b. That in all other respects, the motion is DENIED, including but not limited to, that plaintiff's motion to amend her complaint to add class action claims. Dated December 7, 2010, at Denver, Colorado. BY THE COURT:

2