Harris v. Wilkes, 5:13cv382-WS/EMT. (2018)
Court: District Court, N.D. Florida
Number: infdco20180509c95
Visitors: 12
Filed: May 08, 2018
Latest Update: May 08, 2018
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION WILLIAM STAFFORD , Senior District Judge . Before the court is the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (doc. 146) docketed April 18, 2018. The magistrate judge recommends that Plaintiff's Motion for Relief from Judgment (doc. 124) be denied. Plaintiff has filed objections (doc. 147) to the report and recommendation. The court has reviewed the record, including—but not limited to—the magistrate judge's report and recom
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION WILLIAM STAFFORD , Senior District Judge . Before the court is the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (doc. 146) docketed April 18, 2018. The magistrate judge recommends that Plaintiff's Motion for Relief from Judgment (doc. 124) be denied. Plaintiff has filed objections (doc. 147) to the report and recommendation. The court has reviewed the record, including—but not limited to—the magistrate judge's report and recomm..
More
ORDER ADOPTING THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
WILLIAM STAFFORD, Senior District Judge.
Before the court is the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (doc. 146) docketed April 18, 2018. The magistrate judge recommends that Plaintiff's Motion for Relief from Judgment (doc. 124) be denied. Plaintiff has filed objections (doc. 147) to the report and recommendation.
The court has reviewed the record, including—but not limited to—the magistrate judge's report and recommendation (doc. 146), Plaintiff's objections (doc. 147) to the report and recommendation, Plaintiff's Motion for Relief from Judgment (doc. 124) and supplement thereto (docs. 127 & 133), Defendants' response (doc. 131) to Plaintiff's Motion for Relief from Judgment, and the magistrate judge's prior order (doc. 123) in response to Plaintiff's Motion to Clarify Lien Payment Structure. Like the magistrate judge, this court finds that Plaintiff has failed to establish a basis for relief from judgment under Rule 60(b).1
Accordingly, it is ORDERED:
1. The magistrate judge's report and recommendation (doc. 146) is ADOPTED and incorporated into this order by reference.
2. Plaintiff's Motion for Relief from Judgment (doc. 124) is DENIED.
3. Plaintiff's Motion (doc. 134) to Strike Defendants' Response is DENIED.
DONE AND ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. Plaintiff has established neither duress on the part of Defendants nor fraud in the payment of settlement funds toward the fee owed in this case. To the extent Plaintiff complains that the "fraud" centers around a $315.00 lien in a different case, that issue is not properly before this court.
Source: Leagle
