Rhodes v. Sterling Mccall Nissan et al

Filing 31

ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATIONS re: 29 Memorandum and Recommendations granting 18 MOTION TO DISMISS FOR FAILURE TO STATE A CLAIM as to Plaintiffs Fair Credit Reporting Act claim; the claims brought under 18 U.S.C. §
67; 1341, 1343, and 1951; the claim brought under 12 U.S.C. § 83; and the Truth in Lending Act (TILA) claim to the extent that Plaintiff seeks recission of the vehicle transaction. However, the motion is DENIED as to Plaintiffs TILA claim to the extent Plaintiff claims that Defendants failed to disclose certain terms and conditions of the transaction. (Signed by Judge George C Hanks, Jr) Parties notified.(bthomas, 4)

United States District Court
Southern District of Texas

ENTERED
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
JADA MONAE RHODES,
Plaintiff.
VS.
STERLING MCCALL NISSAN, et
al.,
Defendants.

August 12, 2022
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk

§
§
§
§
§ CIVIL ACTION NO. 4:21-cv-04221
§
§
§
§
§

ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S
MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
On June 14, 2022, Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 18) was referred to United
States Magistrate Judge Andrew M. Edison under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Dkt. 21. Judge
Edison filed a Memorandum and Recommendation on July 27, 2022, recommending the
motion be GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. See Dkt. 29.
On August 10, 2022, Plaintiff filed a Response to Defendant’s Reply for Motion to
Dismiss. See Dkt. 30. Because this document was filed after Judge Edison issued a
Memorandum and Recommendation in this matter, I will consider Plaintiff’s latest
pleading as timely filed objections to Judge Edison’s Memorandum and Recommendation.
In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), this Court is required to “make a de novo
determination of those portions of the [magistrate judge’s] report or specified proposed
findings or recommendations to which objection [has been] made.” After conducting this
de novo review, the Court may “accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings
or recommendations made by the magistrate judge.” Id.; see also FED. R. CIV. P. 72(b)(3).

The Court has carefully considered the objections, the Memorandum and
Recommendation, the pleadings, and the record. The Court ACCEPTS Judge Edison’s
Memorandum and Recommendation and ADOPTS it as the opinion of the Court. It is
therefore ORDERED that:
(1)

Judge Edison’s Memorandum and Recommendation (Dkt. 29) is
APPROVED AND ADOPTED in its entirety as the holding of the Court;
and

(2)

Defendants’ Motion to Dismiss (Dkt. 18) is GRANTED as to Plaintiff’s Fair
Credit Reporting Act claim; the claims brought under 18 U.S.C. §§ 1341,
1343, and 1951; the claim brought under 12 U.S.C. § 83; and the Truth in
Lending Act (“TILA”) claim to the extent that Plaintiff seeks recission of the
vehicle transaction. However, the motion is DENIED as to Plaintiff’s TILA
claim to the extent Plaintiff claims that Defendants failed to disclose certain
terms and conditions of the transaction.

It is so ORDERED.
SIGNED and ENTERED this 11th day of August 2022.

________________________________
_
______________________________________
GEORGE C. HANKS, JR.
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

2