Hallum et al v. Four Corners OB-GYN, et al
Filing
131
ORDER ADOPTING 130 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS; GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART 46 Motion for Leave to File by District Judge Martha Vazquez. See Order for Specifics. (gr)
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF NEW MEXICO
TANYA HALLUM, et al.,
Plaintiffs,
v.
Case No. 17-00007 MV/SCY
FOUR CORNERS OB-GYN, et al.,
Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S PROPOSED FINDINGS
AND RECOMMENDED DISPOSITION
THIS MATTER is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Steven Yarbrough’s Proposed
Findings and Recommended Disposition (“PFRD”) recommending that Plaintiffs’ Motion to
Stay Ruling on Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint be denied. Doc. 130.
Magistrate Judge Yarbrough further recommended that Plaintiffs’ Motion to Amend be granted
to the extent that Plaintiffs sought the amendment to withdraw their claim for negligent infliction
of emotional distress. Doc. 130. Magistrate Judge Yarbrough otherwise recommended that the
Motion be denied. Doc. 130. The parties have not filed any objections to the PFRD, thereby
waiving their right to review of the proposed disposition. See United States v. One Parcel of Real
Prop., 73 F.3d 1057, 1060 (10th Cir. 1996). Furthermore, upon review of the record, the Court
concurs with the Magistrate Judge’s findings and recommendations.
IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED THAT:
1. The Magistrate Judge’s Proposed Findings and Recommended Disposition (Doc. 130)
is ADOPTED.
2. Plaintiffs’ Motion to Stay Ruling on Plaintiffs’ Motion to Amend is DENIED (Doc.
54).
3. Plaintiffs’ Motion for Leave to File Amended Complaint (Doc. 46) is GRANTED IN
PART and DENIED IN PART. Plaintiffs may file an amended complaint
withdrawing their claim for negligent infliction of emotional distress.
___________________________________
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
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?