Crawley-Kelsey v. Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. et al
Filing
93
ORDER: The plaintiff's 92 Motion for a further extension of time within which to object to the Report and Recommendation is DENIED. The 66 Report and Recommendation is ACCEPTED and made the findings of fact and conclusions of law of this cou rt. For the reasons expressed therein, it is hereby ORDERED that the defendants' 29 Motion To Dismiss And To Substitute is GRANTED. It is further ORDERED that defendants The Hartford Insurance Company, The Hartford Financial Services Group, In c., The Hartford-Benefit Management Services, and The Hartford-Disability Claim Appeal Unit are DISMISSED as defendants in this case, and Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company is hereby SUBSTITUTED as the sole defendant. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 09/30/2010. (xc:Pro se party by regular and certified mail.)(ab)
Crawley-Kelsey v. Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc. et al
Doc. 93
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE NASHVILLE DIVISION LEAH CRAWLEY-KELSEY, Plaintiff, v. HARTFORD FINANCIAL SERVICES GROUP, INC., THE HARTFORD INSURANCE COMPANY, THE HARTFORD-BENEFIT MANAGEMENT SERVICES, and THE HARTFORD-DISABILITY CLAIM APPEAL UNIT, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Civil No. 3:09-0698 Judge Trauger Magistrate Judge Griffin
ORDER On September 7, 2010, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 66), recommending that the defendants' Motion To Dismiss And To Substitute (Docket No. 29) be granted. On September 23, 2010, the court granted the plaintiff an extension until September 29, 2010 within which to file objections to this Report and Recommendation. (Docket No. 89) On September 28, 2010, the plaintiff filed a second Motion, requesting an extension of time for objecting to this Report and Recommendation. (Docket No. 92) The court has reviewed the well-reasoned Report and Recommendation issued by the Magistrate Judge and finds that the plaintiff's objecting to this Report and Recommendation would be futile. The plaintiff's Motion for a further extension of time within which to object to the Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 92) is therefore DENIED.
The Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 66) is ACCEPTED and made the 1
Dockets.Justia.com
findings of fact and conclusions of law of this court. For the reasons expressed therein, it is hereby ORDERED that the defendants' Motion To Dismiss And To Substitute (Docket No. 29) is GRANTED. It is further ORDERED that defendants The Hartford Insurance Company, The Hartford Financial Services Group, Inc., The Hartford-Benefit Management Services, and The Hartford-Disability Claim Appeal Unit are DISMISSED as defendants in this case, and Hartford Life and Accident Insurance Company is hereby SUBSTITUTED as the sole defendant. It is so ORDERED. Enter this 30th day of September 2010.
________________________________ ALETA A. TRAUGER U.S. 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?