HALL v. HOME DEPOT USA INC et al

Filing 85

ORDER AFFIRMING RECOMMENDED DECISION AND MEMORANDUM DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND ORDER ON MOTION FOR SEPARATE TRIALS - denying 30 Motion for Summary Judgment; directing the Clerk to schedule Oral Argument on 76 Motion to Bifurcate; adopting Report and Recommended Decision re 79 Report and Recommendations. By JUDGE D. BROCK HORNBY. (mnw)

HALL v. HOME DEPOT USA INC et al

Doc. 85

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE ) ) PLAINTIFF ) ) V. ) ) HOME DEPOT U.S.A., INC., ) ) CRARY COMPANY, AND TERRAMARC INDUSTRIES, INC., ) ) DEFENDANTS ) STEVEN HALL,

CIVIL NO. 09-277-P-H

ORDER AFFIRMING RECOMMENDED DECISION AND MEMORANDUM DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE AND ORDER ON MOTION FOR SEPARATE TRIALS

On September 14, 2010, the United States Magistrate Judge filed with the Court, with copies to counsel, his Recommended Decision on Defendant Home Depot U.S.A., Inc.'s Motion for Summary Judgment and Memorandum Decision on Its Motion to Exclude Testimony. The defendant Home Depot

U.S.A. Inc. filed objections to both on October 1, 2010. I have reviewed and considered the Recommended Decision, together with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Recommended Decision; and I concur with the

recommendations of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in the Recommended Decision. DENIED. I have reviewed and considered the Memorandum Decision. I concur The motion for summary judgment is

with the Magistrate Judge's Memorandum Decision because it is neither clearly

Dockets.Justia.com

erroneous nor contrary to law.

The motion to exclude the testimony of

Robert V. Flynn is GRANTED as to the subject matter of paragraphs 3-15 of his April 2010 declaration (Docket No. 62-2), the matters set forth in the first full paragraph on page 7 of the plaintiff's opposition to the motion to exclude (Docket No. 62) and the paragraph immediately following it, and the tests mentioned in Attorney Pierce's March 25, 2010, letter (Docket No. 70-1), and is otherwise DENIED. The Clerk's Office shall schedule the defendants Crary Company's and Terramarc Industries, Inc.'s motion for separate trials for oral argument. SO ORDERED. DATED THIS 21ST DAY OF OCTOBER, 2010 /S/D. BROCK HORNBY D. BROCK HORNBY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2