Johnson et al v. City of Fayetteville et al

Filing 222

ORDER - The court hereby ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's M&R [DE-216] as it own, and the court ORDERS Defendants to produce, within 14 days of this Order, Dr. Keeton's fitness for duty examination of Defendant Kohler. It is further ORDERED that the deposition of Dr. Keeton is reopened for examination regarding this report. Plaintiffs' motions to compel [DE-170; DE-174] are denied in all other respects. Signed by Senior Judge James C. Fox on 7/29/2014. (Grady, B.)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA WESTERN DIVISION No. 5:12-CV-456-F DARWIN JOHNSON, et al., Plaintiffs, v. CITY OF FAYETTEVILLE; et al., Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ORDER This matter is before the court on the Order and Memorandum and Recommendation ("M&R") [DE-216] filed by United States Magistrate Judge Robert B. Jones, Jr. Therein, Judge Jones recommends that Plaintiffs' request for relief in ground two of Plaintiffs' motions to compel [DE-170; 174] be allowed. 1 Any objections to the Magistrate Judge's M&R were due within fourteen (14) days of receipt, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b)(1), Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(2), and Local Civil Rule 72.4(b), EDNC. The docket indicates that the M&R was served on the parties electronically on June 25, 2014. To date, no objections have been filed. After an independent and thorough review of the Magistrate Judge's M&R and a de novo review of the record, the court concludes that the M&R is correct and in accordance with the law. Accordingly, the court hereby ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge's M&R [DE-216] as it own, and the court ORDERS Defendants to produce, within 14 days of this Order, Dr. Keeton's fitness for duty examination of Defendant Kohler. It is further ORDERED that the deposition of Dr. Keeton is reopened for examination regarding this report. Plaintiffs' motions to compel [DE-1 70; D E-17 4] are 1 Judge Jones also ruled that Plaintiffs' request for relief in grounds on and three of the motions to compel [DE-170, 174] were denied, and that Plaintiffs' Motion for the Appointment of Guardian Ad Litem were allowed. These rulings were not part of the M&R, and need no further review from the court. DENIED in all other respects. SO ORDERED. I This the2-'f day of July, 2014. esC. Fox enior 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?