Easterling v. Cassanos Inc et al

Filing 34

ENTRY AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE MICHAEL J. NEWMAN (ECF 29 ), OVERRULING PLAINTIFF'S OBJECTIONS (ECF 32 ), AND DENYING PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT (ECF 26 ): Case remains CLOSED on this Courts docket. Signed by Judge Thomas M. Rose on 10/3/17. (ep)(This document has been sent by regular mail to the party(ies) listed in the NEF that did not receive electronic notification.)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO WESTERN DIVISION AT DAYTON Warren Easterling, r Plaintiff, v. Case No. 3:16-cv-340 Judge Thomas M. Rose Cassano’s Inc., et al., Defendants. ENTRY AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE MICHAEL J. NEWMAN (ECF 29), OVERRULING PLAINTIFF’S OBJECTIONS (ECF 32), AND DENYING PLAINTIFF’S MOTION FOR RELIEF FROM JUDGMENT (ECF 26). This case is before the Court on Magistrate Judge Michael J. Newman’s Report and Recommendations, (ECF 29), Plaintiff Warren Easterling=s Objections to the Report and Recommendations, (ECF 32), and Plaintiff Warren Easterling=s Motion for Relief from Judgment. (ECF 26). The Report and Recommendation would have the Court deny Plaintiff’s motion. As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the Court has made a de novo review of the record in this case, taking into consideration all objections. Upon said review, the Court finds that the objections, (ECF 32), to Report and Recommendations, (ECF 29), are not well taken and they are hereby OVERRULED. Wherefore, the Court ADOPTS IN FULL the Magistrate Judge=s Report and Recommendations. (ECF 29) Easterling=s Motion for Relief from Judgment, (ECF 26), is DENIED. Plaintiff Warren The case remains CLOSED on this Court’s docket. DONE and ORDERED in Dayton, Ohio, on Tuesday, October 3, 2017. s/Thomas M. Rose ________________________________ THOMAS M. ROSE 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?