NEXT Financial Group Inc. v. Ohio National Life Insurance Company, 4:18-CV-4652. (2019)
Court: District Court, S.D. Texas
Number: infdco20191002e91
Visitors: 23
Filed: Sep. 26, 2019
Latest Update: Sep. 26, 2019
Summary: ORDER ALFRED H. BENNETT , District Judge . Before the Court are the Magistrate Court's Amended Memorandum and Recommendation filed September 3, 2019 (Doc. #32), Plaintiff's Objections (Doc. #30), Defendants' Objections (Doc. #31), Plaintiff's Response (Doc. #34), and Defendants' Response (Doc. #35). 1 The Magistrate Court's findings and conclusions are reviewed de novo. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(C); United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219 (5th Cir. 1989). Having cons
Summary: ORDER ALFRED H. BENNETT , District Judge . Before the Court are the Magistrate Court's Amended Memorandum and Recommendation filed September 3, 2019 (Doc. #32), Plaintiff's Objections (Doc. #30), Defendants' Objections (Doc. #31), Plaintiff's Response (Doc. #34), and Defendants' Response (Doc. #35). 1 The Magistrate Court's findings and conclusions are reviewed de novo. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. 636(b)(1)(C); United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219 (5th Cir. 1989). Having consi..
More
ORDER
ALFRED H. BENNETT, District Judge.
Before the Court are the Magistrate Court's Amended Memorandum and Recommendation filed September 3, 2019 (Doc. #32), Plaintiff's Objections (Doc. #30), Defendants' Objections (Doc. #31), Plaintiff's Response (Doc. #34), and Defendants' Response (Doc. #35).1 The Magistrate Court's findings and conclusions are reviewed de novo. Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C); United States v. Wilson, 864 F.2d 1219 (5th Cir. 1989). Having considered the arguments and applicable law, this Court adopts the Amended Memorandum and Recommendation as this Court's Order.
It is so ORDERED.
FootNotes
1. Defendants also filed a Motion for Leave to File Reply Brief on September 17, 2019 (Doc. #37) and attached a reply in support of their initial objections (Doc. # 31) as an exhibit. Because the Court finds the parties' Objections and Responses are sufficient to adopt the Magistrate Court's Order, Defendants' Motion for Leave is DENIED.
Source: Leagle
