Powe et al v. Deutsche bank National Trust Company
Filing
98
MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE for 89 Report and Recommendations, 90 Report and Recommendations. Plaintiff's Motion 83 is DENIED AS MOOT. Defendant's Motion 83 is GRANTED. Signed by District Judge Amos L. Mazzant, III on 4/24/2018. (daj, )
United States District Court
EASTERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
SHERMAN DIVISION
WAYNE A. POWE, ET AL.
v.
DEUTSCHE BANK NATIONAL TRUST
CO., AS TRUSTEE FO RESIDENTIAL
ASSET SECURITIZATION TRUST
SERIES 2004-A7 MORTGAGE PASSTRHOUGH CERTIFICATES 2004-G
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
Civil Action No. 4:15-CV-661
(Judge Mazzant/Judge Nowak)
MEMORANDUM ADOPTING REPORTS AND
RECOMMENDATIONS OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE
Came on for consideration the reports of the United States Magistrate Judge in this action,
this matter having been heretofore referred to the Magistrate Judge pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636.
On March 16, 2018, the reports of the Magistrate Judge (Dkts. #89, #90) were entered containing
proposed findings of fact and recommendations that Defendant Deutsche Bank’s Motion for
Award of Attorneys’ Fees (Dkt. #81) be granted and Plaintiffs’ “Emergency Motion to Set Aside
Foreclosure Sale and for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction and for an
Expedited Hearing on or Submission of Motion” (Dkt. #83) be denied as moot.
Subsequent to the issuance of the reports, Plaintiff filed two additional Emergency
Motions: “Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction and
for an Expedited Hearing on or Submission of Motion, Motion to Suspend the Enforcement of the
October 24, 2017 Order and to Set Amount of Supersedeas Bond” (Dkt. #91) and “First Amended
Emergency Motion for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction and for an
Expedited Hearing on or Submission of Motion, Motion to Suspend Enforcement of the October
24, 2017 Order and to Set Amount of Supersedeas Bond” (collectively, the “Emergency Motions”)
(Dkt. #94). On April 20, 2018, at Hearing before the Magistrate Judge, Plaintiffs withdrew both
Emergency Motions (Dkt. #97). As such, pending before the Court are only the aforementioned
Reports and Recommendations (Dkts. #89, #90).
Having received the reports of the Magistrate Judge, and no objections thereto having been
timely filed, the Court is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge
are correct and adopts the Magistrate Judge’s reports as the findings and conclusions of the Court.
It is, therefore, ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ “Emergency Motion to Set Aside Foreclosure
Sale and for Temporary Restraining Order and Preliminary Injunction and for an Expedited
Hearing on or Submission of Motion” (Dkt. #83) is DENIED AS MOOT.
It is further ORDERED that Defendant Deutsche Bank’s Motion for Award of Attorneys’
Fees (Dkt. #81) is GRANTED, and Deutsche Bank shall have and recover its attorneys’ fees in
the amount of $16,330.00 from Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants Wayne A. Powe and Regina Y.
Powe. This award exists solely as a further obligation owed by Plaintiffs/Counter-Defendants
Wayne A. Powe and Regina Y. Powe under the Note and Security Instrument recorded as
document number 2004-0098354 in the official public records of Collin County, Texas, and not
as an award of money damages.
The Court previously granted Defendant’s Motion for Summary Judgment (Dkt. #78), and
ordered Defendant to proceed in filing any briefing on the remaining issue of Defendant’s
entitlement to attorney’s fees.
The Court’s adoption of the Magistrate Judge’s Report
and Recommendation on Defendant’s Motion for Award of Attorneys’ Fees herein disposes of all
remaining claims and issues in this case. A final judgment closing this civil action is therefore
entered contemporaneously herewith.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
2
SIGNED this 24th day of April, 2018.
___________________________________
AMOS L. MAZZANT
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?