Webb v. Weber County Government et al

Filing 588

MEMORANDUM DECISION and Order Overruling Objections re: 520 Order, 525 Objection to Magistrate Judge Decision, 529 Response to Objection to Magistrate Judge Decision, 531 Reply to Objection to Magistrate Judge Decision, 532 Obje ction to Magistrate Judge Decision, and 533 Response to Objection to Magistrate Judge Decision. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that each of the Objections is OVERRULED. The Magistrate Judge's Order is not clearly erroneous or... contrary to law. Furthermore, after having reviewed the Magistrate Judge's Order de novo, including the record that was before the Magistrate Judge, the Magistrate Judge's Order is hereby AFFIRMED. Signed by Judge David Nuffer on 12/4/2018. (jwt)

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, NORTHERN DIVISION
DAVID WEBB,

MEMORANDUM DECISION AND
ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS
Plaintiff,
Case No. 1:11-cv-00128

v.
District Judge David Nuffer
WEBER COUNTY, et al.,
Defendants.

United States Magistrate Judge Evelyn J. Furse entered an order (the “Magistrate Judge’s
Order”) 1 granting in part and denying in part various motions for attorneys’ fees and costs.
Plaintiff David Webb filed an objection to the Magistrate Judge’s Order; 2 Defendants Terry
Thompson, Kevin McLeod, Kevin Burton, Alton Johnson, Robert West, and Andrew Flatt also
filed an objection to the Magistrate Judge’s Order (collectively, the “Objections”). 3

1

Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part (1) Ogden City Defendants’ Motion for Determination of Costs and
Attorneys’ Fees (ECF No. 432), (2) Weber County Defendants’ Motion for Determination of Attorney Fees and
Costs (ECF No. 437), and (3) Weber County Defendants’ Supplemental Motion for Determination of Attorney Fees
and Costs (ECF No. 462), docket no. 520, filed June 8, 2018.

2

Objections to Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part (1) Ogden City Defendants’ Motion for Determination of
Costs and Attorneys’ Fees (ECF No. 432), (2) Weber County Defendants’ Motion for Determination of Attorney
Fees and Costs (ECF No. 437), and (3) Weber County Defendants’ Supplemental Motion for Determination of
Attorney Fees and Costs (ECF No. 462) (“Weber’s Objection”), docket no. 525, filed June 15, 2018; see Response
to Objection to Order Granting Costs and Attorneys’ Fees, docket no. 529, filed June 20, 2018; Pro Se Plaintiff
Webb’s Reply to Response to Objections to Order Granting Costs and Attorneys’ Fees (Dkt. No. 525) Against ECF
No. 529, docket no. 531, filed June 22, 2018.
3

Weber County Defendants’ Objection to Order Granting in Part and Denying in Part (1) Ogden City Defendants’
Motion for Determination of Costs and Attorneys’ Fees (ECF No. 432), (2) Weber County Defendants’ Motion for
Determination of Attorney Fees and Costs (ECF No. 437), and (3) Weber County Defendants’ Supplemental Motion
for Determination of Attorney Fees and Costs (ECF No. 462) (“Weber County’s Objection”), docket no. 532, filed
June 22, 2018; see Pro Se Plaintiff Webb’s Response [to] Weber County Defendants’ Objection to Order Granting in
Part and Denying in Part (1) Ogden City Defendants’ Motion for Determination of Costs and Attorneys’ Fees (ECF
No. 432), (2) Weber County Defendants’ Motion for Determination of Attorney Fees and Costs (ECF No. 437), and
(3) Weber County Defendants’ Supplemental Motion for Determination of Attorney Fees and Costs (ECF No. 462),
docket no. 533, filed June 25, 2018.

ORDER
Upon consideration of the Objections,4 and for good cause appearing,
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that each of the Objections 4 is OVERRULED. The
Magistrate Judge’s Order is not “clearly erroneous or . . . contrary to law.” 5 Furthermore, after
having reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Order de novo, including the record that was before the
Magistrate Judge, the Magistrate Judge’s Order 6 is hereby AFFIRMED.
Signed December 4, 2018.
BY THE COURT:

David Nuffer
United States District Judge

4

Webb’s Objection, supra note 2; Weber County’s Objection, supra note 3.

5

FED. R. CIV. P. 72(a).

6

Magistrate Judge’s Order, supra note 1.

2