Alahverdian v. Grebinski et al

Filing 41

ENTRY AND ORDER OVERRULING ALAHVERDIAN'S OBJECTIONS (Doc. #37 ) TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE MERZ'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FORSANCTIONS (Doc. #35 ); ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE MERZ'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SANCTIONS IN ITS ENTIRETY; ORDERING ALAHVERDIAN'S COUNSEL TO PAY DEFENDANTS' THEIR REASONABLE ATTORNEYS' FEES INCURRED IN DEFENDING THIS ACTION AND TERMINATING THIS CASE. Signed by Judge Thomas M Rose on 9/8/14. (ep)

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO
WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON
NICHOLAS ALAHVERDIAN,
Case No. 3:13-cv-132
Plaintiff,
Judge Thomas M. Rose
Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz

-vMARY J. GREBINSKI, et al.,

Defendants.
______________________________________________________________________________
ENTRY AND ORDER OVERRULING ALAHVERDIAN’S OBJECTIONS
(Doc. #37) TO MAGISTRATE JUDGE MERZ’S REPORT AND
RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING DEFENDANTS’ MOTION FOR
SANCTIONS (Doc. #35); ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE MERZ’S
REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS REGARDING DEFENDANTS’
MOTION FOR SANCTIONS IN ITS ENTIRETY; ORDERING
ALAHVERDIAN’S COUNSEL TO PAY DEFENDANTS’ THEIR
REASONABLE ATTORNEYS’ FEES INCURRED IN DEFENDING THIS
ACTION AND TERMINATING THIS CASE
______________________________________________________________________________
Plaintiff Nicholas Alahverdian (“Alahverdian”) brought this action against Defendants
Mary J. Grebinski and Nathan M. Lanning (collectively referred to hereinafter as “Defendants”)
alleging defamation per se, false light invasion of privacy and intentional infliction of emotional
distress. (Doc. #21.) After filing a Motion To Dismiss, the Defendants filed a Motion for
Sanctions which was fully briefed.
On August 6, 2014, Magistrate Judge Michael R. Merz issued a Report and
Recommendations recommending that the Defendants’ Motion for Sanctions be granted and that
Alahverdian’s Counsel be ordered to pay Defendants their reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred in
defending this action (Doc. #35.) Alahverdian subsequently objected to this Report and
Recommendations (Doc. #37.) The Defendants have responded to Alahverdian’s Objections.

(Doc. #39.) Alahverdian’s Objections are, therefore, ripe for decision.
As required by 28 U.S.C. §636(b) and Federal Rules of Civil Procedure Rule 72(b), the
District Judge has made a de novo review of the record in this case. Upon said review, the Court
finds that Alahverdian’s Objections to the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendations
regarding Defendants’ Motion for Sanctions are not well-taken, and they are hereby
OVERRULED. The Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendations regarding Defendants’
Motion for Sanctions is adopted in its entirety.
The Defendants’ Motion for Sanctions is granted. Alahverdian’s Counsel is ordered to
pay Defendants their reasonable attorneys’ fees incurred in defending this action.
Finally, the captioned cause is hereby ordered terminated upon the docket records of the United
States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio, Western Division, at Dayton.
DONE and ORDERED in Dayton, Ohio, this Eighth Day of September, 2014.
s/Thomas M. Rose
_______________________________
THOMAS M. ROSE
UNITED STATED DISTRICT JUDGE
Copies furnished to:
Counsel of Record

-2-