Hall v. Shynett et al
ORDER overruling objections and adopting 92 Report and Recommendation. Pltf's 76 Motion for Default Judgment is denied. Signed by Judge Ron Clark on 7/23/15. (tkd, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
CIVIL ACTION NO. 1:13cv233
ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS AND ADOPTING
THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiff Mitch Hall, proceeding pro se, filed the above-styled civil rights lawsuit against
Betty Shynett, Lisa Wood and Robert H. Kane. The court previously referred this matter to the
Honorable Keith F. Giblin, United States Magistrate Judge, at Beaumont, Texas, for consideration
pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636 and applicable orders of this Court.
Plaintiff has filed a motion asking that a default judgment be entered against defendant Kane
(doc. no. 76). The Magistrate Judge has submitted a Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge concerning this motion. The Magistrate Judge recommends that the motion be
The court has received and considered the Report and Recommendation of United States
Magistrate Judge, along with the record and pleadings. Plaintiff filed objections to the Report
The court has conducted a de novo review of the objections. After careful consideration, the
court is of the opinion that the objections are without merit. The Magistrate Judge correctly
concluded that defendant Hall is are not in default in this matter and that the answer he filed
complied with the requirements of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 8.
Accordingly, the objections filed by plaintiff to the Report and Recommendation are
OVERRULED. The findings of fact and conclusions of law of the Magistrate Judge are correct and
the report of the Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED as the opinion of the court. Plaintiff’s motion for
a default judgment is DENIED.
So ORDERED and SIGNED this 23 day of July, 2015.
Ron Clark, United States District Judge
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?