Buchannan v. Diversified Consultants, Inc.

Filing 51

ORDER adopting 49 Report and Recommendations and granting 41 Agreed Petition for the Court's Approval of the Parties' Settlement of the Minors FDCPA and TCPA Claims, by Judge Robert E. Blackburn on 8/7/2014.(trlee, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Robert E. Blackburn
Civil Action No. 12-cv-02410-REB-KMT
ERIC BUCHANNAN, as Guardian for T.B., a Minor,
Plaintiff,
v.
DIVERSIFIED CONSULTANTS, INC.,
Defendant.

ORDER ADOPTING RECOMMENDATION OF
UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Blackburn, J.
This matter is before me on the following: (1) the Agreed Petition for the
Court’s Approval of the Parties’ Settlement of the Minor’s FDCPA and TCPA
Claims [#41]1 filed January 17, 2014; and (2) the Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge [#49] filed May 8, 2014. Because no objection to the
recommendation was filed, I review the recommendation only for plain error. See
Morales-Fernandez v. Immigration & Naturalization Service, 418 F.3d 1116, 1122
(10th Cir. 2005). Finding no error, much less plain error, in the recommendation of the
magistrate judge, I approve and adopt the recommendation as an order of this court and
grant the petition [#41].
The plaintiff, Eric Buchannan, as Guardian for T.B., a minor, asserts claims for
violations of the Fair Debt Collections Act (FDCPA), 15 U.S.C. § 1692 et seq., and the
1

“[#41]” is an example of the convention I use to identify the docket number assigned to a
specific paper by the court’s case management and electronic case filing system (CM/ECF). I use this
convention throughout this order.

Telephone Consumer Protection Act (TCPA), 47 U.S.C. § 227, et seq. The claims of
the plaintiff are based on allegations that defendant placed a number of phone calls to
T.B.’s cell phone regarding a debt owed not by T.B. or Mr. Buchannan, but which was
instead owed by an unrelated third-party. The parties have agreed to a settlement of
the claims of Mr. Buchannan. Because T.B. is a minor, the parties ask the court to
review and approve the settlement in an effort to safeguard the interests of T.B. For the
reasons detailed by the magistrate judge, I agree with the conclusion that the settlement
agreement is fair and reasonable to and in the best interests of T.B. and thus should be
approved by the court.
THEREFORE, IT IS ORDERED as follows:
1. That the Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge [#49] filed
May 8, 2014, is APPROVED and ADOPTED as an order of this court; and
2. That the Agreed Petition for the Court’s Approval of the Parties’
Settlement of the Minor’s FDCPA and TCPA Claims [#41] filed January 17, 2014, is
GRANTED; and
3. That the court finds that the settlement agreement between the parties is fair
and reasonable to and in the best interests of the minor plaintiff, T.B., and the
settlement agreement is APPROVED by the court.
Dated August 7, 2014, at Denver, Colorado.
BY THE COURT:

2