Nesmith v. Hospice Compassus

Filing 35

ORDER: The R&R's recommendation that the motion for fees be denied is therefore ACCEPTED and adopted in its entirety, and the fee motion ( 25 ) is DENIED. Because attorney's fees have not been awarded, the Objection ( 34 ) is OVERRULED AS MOOT. Signed by District Judge Aleta A. Trauger on 3/5/19. (xc:Pro se party by regular mail.) (DOCKET TEXT SUMMARY ONLY-ATTORNEYS MUST OPEN THE PDF AND READ THE ORDER.)(gb)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE
NASHVILLE DIVISION
LEVI NESMITH,

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

Plaintiff,
v.
HOSPICE COMPASSUS,
Defendant.

Case No. 3:17-cv-01371
Judge Aleta A. Trauger

ORDER
Before the court is pro se plaintiff Levi Nesmith’s Objection to Award of Attorneys’ Fees.
(Doc. No. 34.) The plaintiff objects to the Report and Recommendation (“R&R”) (Doc. No. 33)
filed by Magistrate Judge Barbara Holmes, recommending that the defendant’s Motion for an
Award of Attorneys’ Fees (Doc. No. 25) be denied or, alternatively, that the defendant be awarded
fees of no more than $1,000. The court presumes that the plaintiff objects only to the alternative
recommendation of fees not to exceed $1,000.
When a party files objections to a magistrate judge’s report and recommendation regarding
a dispositive motion, which includes a post-trial motion for attorney’s fees, see Fed. R. Civ. P.
54(d)(2)(D), the district court must review de novo any portion of the report and recommendation
to which objections are lodged. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) & (C). In
conducting its review, the district court “may accept, reject, or modify the recommended
disposition; receive further evidence; or return the matter to the magistrate judge with
instructions.” Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b)(3). If no objections are filed, the parties waive any claim of
error. See id. (requiring review only of any part of the R&R “that has been properly objected to”).
The defendant has not filed objections to the R&R and, consequently, has waived any claim

2
of error. The R&R’s recommendation that the motion for fees be denied is therefore ACCEPTED
and adopted in its entirety, and the fee motion (Doc. No. 25) is DENIED.
The denial of the defendant’s request for attorney’s fees moots the plaintiff’s Objection to
the magistrate judge’s alternative recommendation that the court award fees of no more than
$1,000. Because attorney’s fees have not been awarded, the Objection (Doc. No. 34) is
OVERRULED AS MOOT.
It is so ORDERED.
ENTER this 5th day of March 2019.

ALETA A. TRAUGER
United States District Judge