Moss V. Princip et al

Filing 172

ORDER ACCEPTING 170 FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE. (Ordered by Senior Judge Barbara M. G. Lynn on 7/3/2024) (agc)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS DALLAS DIVISION DAVID TYLER MOSS, et al., § § § § § § § § § § § Plaintiffs, v. MARKO PRINCIP, et al., Defendants. Case No. 3:14-cv-03088-BT ORDER ACCEPTING FINDINGS, CONCLUSIONS, AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE The Court has under consideration the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Rebecca Rutherford dated June 4, 2024 (ECF No. 170). The Court has made a de novo review of those portions of the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation to which objections were made, and notes that it has considered Movant Brian Martin’s affidavit. Movant claims he did not know he was a defendant represented by Robert Wilson during the trial that is the subject of this case. That position is belied by the record of the trial. See, e.g., ECF No. 88, page 18: “My name is Robert Doyle Wilson. I am an attorney here as well in Dallas, Texas. This is Brian Martin to my left, and to my far left … Marko Princip. We are the Defendants in this case.” 1 The objections are overruled. The Court accepts the Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge. The Movant did not establish a fraud on the Court by clear and convincing evidence. Accordingly, the Court DENIES Brian Martin’s Motion for PostJudgment Relief (ECF No. 169). SO ORDERED, this 3rd day of July, 2024. 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?