Laferney v. The Citizens Bank of East Tennessee et al

Filing 46

ORDER ADOPTING 33 The Report and Recommendations of the Magistrate Judge and is adopted as the opinion of the Court. Plaintiff's Motion for an Injunction and Protective Order is DENIED. Signed by Chief Judge Lisa G. Wood on 4/20/2011. (csr)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA
BRUNSWICK DIVISION

RANDI LAFERNEY,
Plaintiff,
V.

CIVIL ACTION NO.: CV2I0-169

THE CITIZENS BANK OF EAST
TENNESSEE; TERRY MORELOCK,
and WILLIAM E. PHILLIPS,
Defendants

ORDER
After an independent and de novo review, the undersigned concurs with the
Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, to which Objections have been filed.
Plaintiff objects to the Magistrate Judge's "cursory" conclusion that she failed to meet
her burden on any of the four (4) prerequisites necessary for the issuance of an
injunction or protective order. (Doc. No. 39, p. 1). Plaintiff asserts that the Magistrate
Judge's Report 'is not based on a thorough evaluation of the facts of the case or the
evidence and arguments" she presented. (Ld. at p. 2).
Despite Plaintiffs objection, it is she who has the burden of proving her
entitlement to an injunction or protective order; it is only after Plaintiff clearly establishes
her burden on all four (4) of the prerequisites that the Court could issue her requested
relief. Instead, Plaintiff failed to meet her burden of persuasion as to each of these four

AO 72A
(Rev. 882)

(4) prerequisites, even in light of the renewed efforts in her Objections. The Consent
Order entered into by Defendant The Citizens Bank of East Tennessee with the Federal
Deposit Insurance Corporation has no bearing on the allegations Plaintiff makes in this
cause of action, nor does it support Plaintiffs assertion that she is entitled to an
injunction or protective order. In fact, as the Magistrate Judge noted, Plaintiff's Motion
is based on suppositions and fears about what Defendants' behavior might be if her
potential witnesses testified on Plaintiffs behalf.
Plaintiff's Objections are overruled. The Magistrate Judge's Report and
Recommendation is adopted as the opinion of the Court. Plaintiff's Motion for an
Injunction and Protective Order is DENIED
SO ORDERED, this

day of

_,2011.

LISA C
UNITE STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOY,-' ERN DISTRICT OF GEORGIA

AO 72A
(Rev. 882)

2