Medrano et al v. Elmer's Painting and Remodeling, Inc. et al

Filing 20

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION re 13 Plaintiffs' MOTION for Default Judgment as to Defendants filed by Griselda Medrano, Oscar Ivan Ravelo Ramirez. Signed by Magistrate Judge William Connelly on 8/2/2017. Objections due 8/16/17. (Attachments: # 1 Exhibit Letter, # 2 Errata FRCP 72)(nk, Chambers)(copy mailed to pro se Defendants Elmer Melgar & Elmer's Painting and Remodeling, Inc.)

Download PDF
SPECIAL signed, without the parties' consent, to hear a pretrial matter dispositive of' a claim or defense or a prisoner petition challenging the conditions of confinement. A record must be made of all evidentiary proceedings and may, at the magistrate judge's discretion, be made of any other proceedings. The magistrate judge must enter a recommended disposition, including, if appropriate, proposed findings of fact. The clerk must promptly mail a copy to each party. (2) Objections. Within 14 days after being served with a copy of the recommended disposition, a party may serve and file specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations. A party may respond to another party's objections within 14 days after being served with a copy. Unless the district judge orders otherwise, the objecting party must promptly arrange for transcribing the record, or whatever portions of it the parties agree to or the magistrate judge considers sufficient. (3) Resolving Objections. The district judge must determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge's disposition that has been properly objected to. The district judge may accept, reject, or modify the recommended disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions. should be a lawyer and all members should have some background qualifying them to weigh proof of value in the real estate field and, when possible, in the particular real estate market embracing the land in question. The amended Rule should give litigants greater confidence in the commission procedure by affording them certain rights to participate in the appointment of commission members that are roughly comparable to the practice with regard to jury selection. This is accomplished by giving the court permission to allow the parties to examine prospective commissioners and by recognizing the right of each party to object to the appointment of any person for cause. . 1987 Amendment The amendments are technical. No substantive change is intended. 1988 Amendment The amendment is technical., No substantive change is intended. 1993 Amendment The references to the subdivisions of Rule 4 are deleted in light of the revision of that rule. 2003 Amendment The references to specific subdivisions of Rule 53 are deleted or revised to reflect amendments of Rule 53. . (Former Rule 72 abrogated December 4, 1967, effective July 1, 1968; new Rule 72 adopted April 28, 1983, effective August 1, 1983; amended April 30, 1991, effective December 1, 1991; April 22, 1993, effective December 1, 1993; April 30, 2007, effective December 1, 2007; March 26, 2009, effective December 1, 2009.) 2007 Amendment The language of Rule 71A has been amended 'as part of the general restyling of the Civil Rules to make them more easily understood and to make style and terminology consistent throughout the rules. These changes are intended to be stylistic only. Former Rule 71A has been redesignated as Rule 71.1 to conform to the designations used for all other rules added with the original numbering system. Rule 71.1(e) allows a defendant to appear without answering. Former form 28 (now form 60) includes information about this right in the Rule 71.1(d)(2) notice. It is useful to confirm this practice in the rule. The information that identifies the attorney is changed to include telephone number and electronic-mail address, in line with similar amendments to Rules l1(a) and 26(g)(1). ADVISORY COMMITTEE 2009 Amendment Magistrate Judges: Pretrial Order (a) Nondispositive Matters. When a pretrial matter not dispositive of a party's claim or defense is referred to a magistrate judge to hear and decide, the magistrate judge must promptly conduct the required proceedings and, when appropriate, issue a written order stating the decision. A party may serve and file objections to the order within 14 days after being served with a copy. A party may not assign as error a defect in the order not timely objected to. The district judge in the case must consider timely objections and modify or set aside any part of the order that is clearly erroneous or is contrary to law. (b) Dispositive Motions and Prisoner Petitions. (1) Findings and Recommendations. A magistr'ate judge must promptly conduct the required proceedings when asFor Complete Annotation NOTES 1983 Addition The times set in the former rule at 20 days have been revised to 21 days. See the Note to Rule 6. Rule 72. Rule 72 PROCEEDINGS Subdivision (a). This subdivision addresses court-ordered referrals of nondispositive matters under 28 U.S.C. ~ 636(b)(1)(A). The rule calls for a written order of the magistrate's disposition to preserve the record and facilitate review. An oral order read into the record by the magistrate will satisfy this requirement. No specific procedures or timetables for raising objections to the magistrate's rulings on nondispositive matters are set forth in the Magistrates Act. The rule fixes alO-day period in order to avoid uncertainty and provide uniformity that will eliminate the confusion that. might arise if different periods were prescribed by local rule in different districts. It also is contemplated that a party who is successful before the magistrate will be afforded an opportunity to respond to objections raised to the magistrate's ruling. The last sentence of subdivision (a) specifies that reconsideration of a magistrate's order, as provided for in the Magistrates Act, shall be by the district judge to whom the case is assigned. This rule does not restrict experimentation by the district courts under 28 U.S.C.' ~ 636(b)(3) involving references of matters other than pretrial matters, such as appointment of counsel, taking of default judgments, and acceptance of jury verdicts when the judge is unavailable. Subdivision (b). This subdivision governs court-ordered referrals of dispositive pretrial matters and prisoner petitions challenging conditions of confinement, pursuant to statutory authorization in 28 U.S.C. ~ 636(b)(1)(B). This rule does not extend to habeas corpus petitions, which are covered by the specific rules relating to proceedings under Sections 2254 and 2255 of Title 28. This rule implements the statutory procedures for making objections to the magistrate's proposed findings and recommendations. The 1Q-day period, as specified in the statute, is subject to Rule 6(e) which provides for an additional 3-day period when service is made by mail. Although no specific provision appears in the Magistrates Act, the rule Materials, see United States Code Annotated 253

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?