Jackson v. U.S. Bank National Association

Filing 17

ORDER APPROVING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION 15 ; signed by Chief Judge Robert J. Jonker (Chief Judge Robert J. Jonker, sdb)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT WESTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION IN RE: MELINDIA JACKSON, Debtor. __________________________________/ MELINDIA JACKSON, CASE NO. 1:16-CV-369 Appellant, HON ROBERT J. JONKER v. U.S. BANK NATIONAL ASSOCIATION, successor in interest trustee of Wachovia Bank, N.A., trustee of GSMPS Mortgage Loan Trust 2004-1, Appellee. __________________________________/ ORDER APPROVING AND ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION The Court has reviewed Magistrate Judge Green’s Report and Recommendation in this matter (ECF No. 15) and Appellant’s Objections to the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 16). Under the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, where, as here, a party has objected to portions of a Report and Recommendation, “[t]he district judge . . . has a duty to reject the magistrate judge’s recommendation unless, on de novo reconsideration, he or she finds it justified.” 12 WRIGHT, MILLER, & MARCUS, FEDERAL PRACTICE AND PROCEDURE § 3070.2, at 381 (2d ed. 1997). Specifically, the Rules provide that: [t]he 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. FED R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3). De novo review in these circumstances requires at least a review of the evidence before the Magistrate Judge. Hill v. Duriron Co., 656 F.2d 1208, 1215 (6th Cir. 1981). The Court has reviewed de novo the claims and evidence presented to the Magistrate Judge; the Report and Recommendation itself; and Appellant’s objections. After its review, the Court finds that Magistrate Judge Green’s Report and Recommendation is factually sound and legally correct. The Magistrate Judge recommends denying Appellant’s appeal from the U.S. Bankruptcy Court and affirming the decision of the Bankruptcy Court, which dismissed Jackson’s adversary complaint. (ECF No. 15). In her Objections, Appellant primarily reiterates and expands arguments she presented in her motion papers. In a carefully crafted Report and Recommendation, the Magistrate Judge laid out Appellant’s previous attempts to proceed in courts within this district. and accurately addresses Appellant’s arguments. Nothing in Plaintiff’s Objections changes the fundamental analysis that the Bankruptcy Court lacked subject matter jurisdiction over Appellant’s adversary complaint under the Rooker-Feldman doctrine. The Court agrees with the Magistrate Judge’s conclusion for the very reasons the Report and Recommendation delineates. ACCORDINGLY, IT IS ORDERED that the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge (ECF No. 15) is approved and adopted as the opinion of the Court. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that the decision of the Bankruptcy Court dismissing Appellant’s adversary complaint is AFFIRMED. This case is DISMISSED. Date: September 10, 2017 /s/ Robert J. Jonker ROBERT J. JONKER CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

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?