Rumsey Land Co., LLC et al v. Resource Land Holdings, LLC et al

Filing 82

ORDER Affirming and Adopting the 75 Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Mark L Carman. Defendants RLH's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 31 ) is DENIED. Defendant PBT's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 36 ) is GRANTED as to Plaintiff William Romanowski's Claims III and VI, and that these two claims, as alleged by Romanowski, are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Claims III and VI, as asserted by Plaintiff Rumsey Land Co., LLC, remain. Defendant PBT's Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 36 ) is DENIED as to all other claims. By Judge Christine M. Arguello on 03/30/2018. (athom, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO
Judge Christine M. Arguello
Civil Action No. 16-cv-02117-CMA-MLC
In RE: RUMSEY LAND CO. LLC,
Debtor.
RUMSEY LAND COMPANY, LLC, and
WILLIAM T. ROMANOWSKI,
Plaintiffs,
v.
RESOURCES LAND HOLDING, LLC,
SORIN NATURAL RESOURCE PARTNERS, LLC, and
PUEBLO BANK AND TRUST COMPANY, LLC,
Defendants.
______________________________________________________________________
ORDER AFFIRMING AND ADOPTING THE RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED
STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE MARK L. CARMAN
______________________________________________________________________
This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation by United States
Magistrate Judge Mark L. Carman (Doc. # 75), wherein he recommended that this Court
deny Defendants’ Resource Land Holdings, LLC and Sorin Natural Resource Partners,
LLC’s (“RLH”) Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 31) and grant in part Defendant Pueblo Bank
and Trust Company, LLC’s (“PBT”) Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 36). The
Recommendation is incorporated herein by reference. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B);
Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).

Magistrate Judge Carman advised the parties that specific written objections
were due within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of the
Recommendation. (Doc. # 77.) Despite this advisement, no objections to the
Recommendation have been filed. “[T]he district court is accorded considerable
discretion with respect to the treatment of unchallenged magistrate reports. In the
absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate [judge’s] report
under any standard it deems appropriate.” Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167
(10th Cir. 1991).
After reviewing the Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Carman and all
relevant pleadings and legal authority, the Court is satisfied that the Recommendation is
sound and not clearly erroneous or contrary to law. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a).
Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Recommendation of the United States
Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 75) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that Defendants RLH’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 31) is
DENIED. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant PBT’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 36) is
GRANTED as to Plaintiff William Romanowski’s Claims III and VI, and that these two
claims, as alleged by Romanowski, are DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Claims III
and VI, as asserted by Plaintiff Rumsey Land Co., LLC, remain. It is
FURTHER ORDERED that Defendant PBT’s Motion to Dismiss (Doc. # 36) is
DENIED as to all other claims.

2

DATED: March 30, 2018

BY THE COURT:

_______________________________
CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO
United States District Judge

3