BANKERS BANK NORTHEAST V. AYER et al
Filing
151
ORDER AFFIRMING THE RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE denying 83 Motion for Summary Judgment; denying 135 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; adopting Report and Recommended Decision re 143 Report and Recommendations. ; denying 148 Motion for Oral Argument/Hearing; denying 149 Motion for Oral Argument/Hearing By JUDGE GEORGE Z. SINGAL. (lrc) Modified on 9/4/2012 to create relationship to motion #83 for summary judgment(lrc).
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
District of Maine
BANKERS’ BANK NORTHEAST,
Plaintiff
v.
EVERETT L. AYER, et al.,
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 1:12-cv-00127-GZS
ORDER AFFIRMING THE
RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE
The United States Magistrate Judge filed with the Court on July 17, 2012, her Recommended
Decision (ECF No. 143). Defendants Ayer, Goodwin, Graceffa, Heselton, Hollingdale, Lacasse,
McClay, and Rizzo (“the Former Directors”) filed their Objections to the Recommended Decision
regarding their Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 146) on August 10, 2012. Defendant
Arthur C. Markos filed his Objection to the Recommended Decision on his renewed Motion to
Dismiss (ECF No. 147) on August 10, 2012. Plaintiff filed its Response to Defendants’ Objections
to the Magistrate Judge’s Recommended Decision Regarding Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss and
Motion for Summary Judgment (ECF No. 150) on August 27, 2012.
I have reviewed and considered the Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision, together
with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the
Magistrate Judge's Recommended Decision; and I concur with the recommendations of the United
States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in her Recommended Decision, and determine that
no further proceeding is necessary.
1. It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge
is hereby AFFIRMED.
2. It is ORDERED that Plaintiff’s claims of breach of implied covenant of good faith
and fair dealing as to Defendant Markos and the Directors Defendants are
DISMISSED.
3. It is ORDERED that Defendant Markos’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 135) is
DENIED.
4. It is ORDERED that the Directors Defendants’ Motion for Summary Judgment
(ECF No. 83) as to the remaining claims of negligent misrepresentation is DENIED.
5. It is ORDERED that Defendant Markos’s Motion for Oral Argument (ECF No. 148)
is DENIED.
6. It is ORDERED that Directors Defendants’ Motion for Oral Argument (ECF No.
149) is DENIED.
/s/George Z. Singal_____________
U.S. District Judge
Dated this 4th day of September, 2012.
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?