Endsley v. Green Tree Servicing LLC

Filing 47

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 40 Report and Recommendation. Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 21) is GRANTED. It is further. ORDERED that Plaintiffs above-entitled and numbered cause of action is hereby DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE. Signed by Judge Robert W. Schroeder, III on 5/8/2017. (slo, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT
COURT OF THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF
TEXAS TEXARKANA DIVISION
KAREN ENDSLEY, INDIVIDUALLY
AND AS INDEPENDENT EXECUTRIX
FOR THE ESTATE OF MICHAEL R.
ENDSLEY
V.
GREEN TREE SERVICING LLC

§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§

Case No. 5:15-CV-151-RWS-CMC

MEMORANDUM ORDER
The above-entitled and numbered civil action was referred to United States Magistrate Judge
Caroline M. Craven pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636. The Report of the Magistrate Judge (Docket
No. 40), which contains her proposed findings of fact and recommendations for the disposition of
such action, has been presented for consideration. The Magistrate Judge issued the Report and
Recommendation on February 8, 2017, recommending Defendant’s motion for summary judgment
be granted and that Plaintiff’s cause of action be dismissed with prejudice because (1) Defendant
was not estopped from foreclosing on the disputed property, (2) foreclosure was not barred by
limitations, (3) Defendant has standing to foreclose, (4) Plaintiff failed to allege any facts to
support her claim to quiet title, and (5) Defendant conclusively established that Plaintiff defaulted
on a loan secured by a lien and that Plaintiff had been given proper notice of default.
On February 28, 2017, Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, filed a motion for extension of time in
which to file objections to the Report and Recommendation. On March 3, the Court granted
Plaintiff’s motion, allowing Plaintiff until March 9 to file any objections she might have to the
Report and Recommendation. Plaintiff was advised that failure to timely file objections to the
proposed findings and recommendations contained in the Report and Recommendation would bar

Plaintiff from de novo review by the district court of the proposed findings and recommendations
and from appellate review of factual findings accepted or adopted by the district court except on
grounds of plain error or manifest injustice. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 148 (1985).
It has been over one month since the Magistrate Judge issued her Report and
Recommendation, and no objections to the Report and Recommendation have been filed. The Court
.
is of the opinion that the findings and conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct. Therefore,
the Court hereby adopts the Report of the United States Magistrate Judge as the findings and
conclusions of this Court. Accordingly, it is hereby
ORDERED that Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment (Docket No. 21) is
GRANTED. It is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff’s above-entitled and numbered cause of action is hereby
DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
SIGNED this 8th day of May, 2017.

____________________________________
ROBERT W. SCHROEDER III
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Page 2 of 2