Guardian Life Insurance Company of America, The v. Wilds

Filing 68

ORDER that Magistrate Judge Mixs Recommendation ECF No. 65 is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. As such, the Movants Amended Motion to Enforce Attorneys Lien ECF No. 56 is GRANTED IN PART to the extent that Movants be awarded $50,160.32, plus interest a t the rate set by 28 U.S.C. § 1961, accruing from January 28, 2013. It is FURTHER ORDERED that the $336,634.93 in the Courts Registry be distributed as follows: $50,160.32, plus interest at the rate set by 28 U.S.C. § 1961, accruing from January 28, 2013, to Movants and the remaining amount to Susan Wilds. by Judge Wiley Y. Daniel on 10/16/2014.(evana, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Senior Judge Wiley Y. Daniel
Civil Action No.

12-cv-01215-WYD-KLM

GUARDIAN LIFE INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, a New York Mutual Life
Insurance Corporation,
Plaintiff,
v.
SUSAN WILDS, an individual,
Defendant.

ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES
MAGISTRATE JUDGE

THIS MATTER is before the Court on the Amended Motion to Enforce Attorneys’
Lien (ECF No. 56), filed on November 15, 2013, by Defendant/Counterclaimant’s former
counsel, Donald F. D’Antuono and Douglas A. Turner (“Movants”). This motion was
referred to Magistrate Judge Mix, who issued a Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 65), filed August 12, 2014, and is incorporated herein by
reference. See 28 U.S.C. sec 636(b)(1), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), D.C.COLO.LCivR. 72.1.
Magistrate Judge Mix recommended therein that the Movants’ Amended Motion to
Enforce Attorneys’ Lien be granted in part. Specifically, Magistrate Judge Mix
recommended that the Movants’ Amended Motion to Enforce Attorneys’ Lien be granted
to the extent that Movants be awarded $50,160.32, plus interest at the rate set by 28
U.S.C. § 1961, accruing from January 28, 2013. Magistrate Judge Mix further
recommended that the $336,634.93 in the Court’s Registry be distributed as follows:

$50,160.32, plus interest at the rate set by 28 U.S.C. § 1961, accruing from January 28,
2013, to Movants and the remaining amount to Defendant/Counterclaimant, Susan Wilds.
Magistrate Judge Mix advised the parties that written objections were due within
fourteen (14) days after service of a copy of the Recommendation. Despite this
advisement, no objections were filed to the Magistrate Judge's Recommendation.1 No
objections having been filed, I am vested with discretion to review the Recommendation
"under any standard [I] deem[] appropriate." Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167
(10th Cir. 1991); see also Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150 (1985) (stating that "[i]t does
not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate's factual
or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to
those findings"). Nonetheless, though not required to do so, I review the
Recommendation to "satisfy [my]self that there is no clear error on the face of the
record."2 See FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b) Advisory Committee Notes.
Having reviewed the Recommendation (ECF No. 65), I am satisfied that there is no
clear error on the face of the record. I find that the Recommendation is thorough,
well-reasoned, and sound.
CONCLUSION
After careful consideration of the matters before the Court, it is

1

In a letter dated August 20, 2014, Susan Wilds indicated that she had no objections to
the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation unless the recommendation was challenged by the
Movants. (ECF No. 66). Since the Movants did not file an objection, I do not construe this letter
as an objection to the recommendation.
2

Note, this standard of review is something less than a "clearly erroneous or contrary to
law" standard of review, Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a), which in turn is less than a de novo review, Fed. R.
Civ. P. 72(b).

-2-

ORDERED that Magistrate Judge Mix’s Recommendation (ECF No. 65) is
AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. As such, the Movants’ Amended Motion to Enforce
Attorneys’ Lien (ECF No. 56) is GRANTED IN PART to the extent that Movants be
awarded $50,160.32, plus interest at the rate set by 28 U.S.C. § 1961, accruing from
January 28, 2013. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that the $336,634.93 in the Court’s Registry be
distributed as follows: $50,160.32, plus interest at the rate set by 28 U.S.C. § 1961,
accruing from January 28, 2013, to Movants and the remaining amount to Susan Wilds.
Dated: October 16, 2014.
BY THE COURT:

s/ Wiley Y. Daniel
WILEY Y. DANIEL,
SENIOR UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

-3-