HUGHES v. WALKER, 2:10-cv-03024-WBS-GGH. (2015)
Court: District Court, E.D. California
Number: infdco20150224948
Visitors: 6
Filed: Feb. 20, 2015
Latest Update: Feb. 20, 2015
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM B. SHUBB, District Judge. On January 29, 2015, petitioner filed "objections" which this court construes as a request for reconsideration of the magistrate judge's order filed December 17, 2014, denying an evidentiary hearing. Pursuant to E.D. Local Rule 303(f), a magistrate judge's orders shall be upheld unless "clearly erroneous or contrary to law." Id. Upon review of the entire file, the court finds that it does not appear that the magistrate judge's ruling was clearly errone
Summary: ORDER WILLIAM B. SHUBB, District Judge. On January 29, 2015, petitioner filed "objections" which this court construes as a request for reconsideration of the magistrate judge's order filed December 17, 2014, denying an evidentiary hearing. Pursuant to E.D. Local Rule 303(f), a magistrate judge's orders shall be upheld unless "clearly erroneous or contrary to law." Id. Upon review of the entire file, the court finds that it does not appear that the magistrate judge's ruling was clearly erroneo..
More
ORDER
WILLIAM B. SHUBB, District Judge.
On January 29, 2015, petitioner filed "objections" which this court construes as a request for reconsideration of the magistrate judge's order filed December 17, 2014, denying an evidentiary hearing. Pursuant to E.D. Local Rule 303(f), a magistrate judge's orders shall be upheld unless "clearly erroneous or contrary to law." Id. Upon review of the entire file, the court finds that it does not appear that the magistrate judge's ruling was clearly erroneous or contrary to law.
Therefore, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, upon reconsideration, the order of the magistrate judge filed December 17, 2014, is affirmed.
Source: Leagle
