UNITED STATES OF AMERICA v. CAMPBELL
ORDER DENYING THE DEFENDANTS MOTION TO DISMISS AND RELATED MOTIONS :The report and recommendation is accepted and adopted as the courts opinion. The defendants motions to dismiss, ECF Nos. 18 and 27 , are denied. The objections, ECF Nos. 30 and 31 , are overruled, and any motion included in the objections is denied. The matter is remanded to the magistrate judge for further proceedings. Signed by JUDGE ROBERT L HINKLE on 11/1/2015. (dac)
Page 1 of 2
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE
NORTHERN DISTRICT OF FLORIDA
UNITED STATES OF AMERICA,
CASE NO. 4:15cv98-RH/CAS
EMMETT MAXWELL CAMPBELL, JR.,
a/k/a MAX CAMPBELL, JR.,
ORDER DENYING THE DEFENDANT’S
MOTION TO DISMISS AND RELATED MOTIONS
The United States filed this action to reduce to judgment and collect tax
liabilities assessed against the defendant. The defendant has filed two motions to
dismiss, ECF Nos. 18 and 27, and two “objections” challenging the court’s
jurisdiction, ECF Nos. 30 and 31. The motions and objections are frivolous.
The first motion to dismiss is before the court on the magistrate judge’s
report and recommendation, ECF No. 26, and the objections, ECF Nos. 30 and 31.
I have reviewed de novo the issues raised by the objections.
The United States has authority to assess income taxes. A federal district
court has jurisdiction to hear a case of this kind. And in such a case—as in any
Case No. 4:15cv98-RH/CAS
Page 2 of 2
civil action—a magistrate judge may enter an order on any nondispositive matter
and may enter a report and recommendation on a dispositive matter. A magistrate
judge’s report and recommendation is subject to de novo review by a district judge,
precisely as has occurred here.
For these reasons and those set out in the report and recommendation,
IT IS ORDERED:
The report and recommendation is accepted and adopted as the court’s
opinion. The defendant’s motions to dismiss, ECF Nos. 18 and 27, are denied.
The objections, ECF Nos. 30 and 31, are overruled, and any motion included in the
objections is denied. The matter is remanded to the magistrate judge for further
SO ORDERED on November 1, 2015.
s/Robert L. Hinkle
United States District Judge
Case No. 4:15cv98-RH/CAS
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?