Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, as Receiver for Washington Mutual Bank v. Fidelity National Title Insurance Company, Successor By Merger To Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation

Filing 107

ORDER Overruling Objections to Magistrate Judge's Order. Signed by District Judge John Corbett O'Meara. (WBar)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION FEDERAL DEPOSIT INSURANCE CORPORATION, as Receiver for Washington Mutual Bank, Plaintiff, Case No. 14-13706 v. Hon. John Corbett O’Meara FIDELITY NATIONAL TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY, Successor by Merger to Lawyers Title Insurance Corporation, Defendant. ________________________________________/ ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S ORDER Before the court are Defendant Fidelity National Title Insurance Company’s objections to the magistrate judge’s rulings on its motion to compel discovery. Plaintiff Federal Deposit Insurance Company and Non-Party JPMorgan Chase Bank submitted responses, to which Defendant replied. Defendant’s objections relate to Magistrate Judge Mona K. Majzoub’s March 24, 2017 opinion and order denying Defendant’s motion to compel. The court may modify or set aside any portion of the magistrate judge’s order that is “clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A). See also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(a). “A finding is ‘clearly erroneous’ when although there is evidence to support it, the reviewing court on the entire evidence is left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed.” Anderson v. City of Bessemer City, 470 U.S. 564, 573 (1985) (quoting United States v. U. S. Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364, 395 (1948)). The court may not disturb the magistrate’s factual findings “even though convinced that had it been sitting as the trier of fact, it would have weighed the evidence differently.” Id. The court allows the magistrate’s legal conclusions to stand unless they are “contrary to law.” Gandee v. Glaser, 785 F. Supp. 684, 686 (S.D. Ohio 1992) aff’d, 19 F.3d 1432 (6th Cir. 1994). Having reviewed the record and Defendant’s objections, the court finds that Magistrate Judge Majzoub’s March 24, 2017 order is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Defendant’s objections are OVERRULED. s/John Corbett O’Meara United States District Judge Date: June 1, 2017 -2- I hereby certify that a copy of the foregoing document was served upon counsel of record on this date, June 1, 2017, using the ECF system. s/William Barkholz Case Manager -3-

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?