Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America v. Sharpe et al
Filing
16
ORDER adopting Report and Recommendations Doc 14 . Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 58(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court will set forth a separate document entering judgment in favor of Plaintiff against Defendants. Signed by District Judge Curtis L Collier on 5/17/2011. (RLC, )
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
AT GREENEVILLE
TRAVELERS CASUALTY AND SURETY
COMPANY OF AMERICA,
Plaintiff,
v.
V. MATHEW SHARPE, STEPHANIE
SHARPE, and NATALIE COOPER
Defendants.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
No. 2:10-CV-224
Chief Judge Curtis L. Collier
ORDER
Plaintiff Travelers Casualty and Surety Company of America (“Travelers”) filed a motion
for default judgment against Defendants V. Mathew Sharpe, Stephanie Sharpe, and Natalie Cooper
(“Defendants”) (Court File No. 9), which the Court referred to United States Magistrate Judge Susan
K. Lee pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and (C) to conduct an evidentiary hearing (Court File
No. 11). In accordance with Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, Judge Lee filed her
report and recommendation recommending that Travelers’ be awarded judgment against Defendants,
jointly and severally, in the amount of $2,803,932.23 (Court File No. 14). None of the parties filed
objections within the given fourteen days.
After reviewing the record, the Court agrees with the magistrate judge’s report and
recommendation. The Court ACCEPTS and ADOPTS the magistrate judge’s findings of fact,
conclusions of law, and recommendations pursuant to Section 636(b)(1) and Rule 72(b).
Accordingly, pursuant to Rule 58(a) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, the Court will
set forth a separate document entering judgment in favor of Plaintiff against Defendants.
SO ORDERED.
ENTER:
/s/
CURTIS L. COLLIER
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?