Norman v. Superior Credit Union, Inc., 1:19-cv-250. (2020)
Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20200313a06
Visitors: 5
Filed: Mar. 09, 2020
Latest Update: Mar. 09, 2020
Summary: ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS (DOC. 36), ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. 35), GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. 9) AND TERMINATING CASE MATTHEW W. McFARLAND , District Judge . This action is before the Court on Plaintiffs Fred and Lydia Norman's Objections (Doc. 36) to Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman's Report and Recommendations (Doc. 35). Magistrate Judge Bowman recommended that the Court grant the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 9) filed by Defendants S
Summary: ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS (DOC. 36), ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. 35), GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. 9) AND TERMINATING CASE MATTHEW W. McFARLAND , District Judge . This action is before the Court on Plaintiffs Fred and Lydia Norman's Objections (Doc. 36) to Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman's Report and Recommendations (Doc. 35). Magistrate Judge Bowman recommended that the Court grant the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 9) filed by Defendants Su..
More
ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS (DOC. 36), ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. 35), GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT (DOC. 9) AND TERMINATING CASE
MATTHEW W. McFARLAND, District Judge.
This action is before the Court on Plaintiffs Fred and Lydia Norman's Objections (Doc. 36) to Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman's Report and Recommendations (Doc. 35). Magistrate Judge Bowman recommended that the Court grant the Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 9) filed by Defendants Superior Credit Union, Inc. f/k/a Cinco Credit Union, Tom Hopper, Jim Zahneis and Perry Lunhe and dismiss this case. Plaintiffs timely filed Objections to the Report and Recommendations, in response to which Defendants filed a memorandum (Doc. 38) supporting the Magistrate Judge's recommended decision. This matter is ripe for the Court's review.
As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the Court made a de novo review of the record in this case. Upon said review, the Court finds that Plaintiffs' Objections (Doc. 36) are not well-taken and accordingly are OVERRULED. The Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendations (Doc. 35) in its entirety and GRANTS Defendants' Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 9). This case is hereby TERMINATED on the Court's docket.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
