Elawyers Elawyers
Washington| Change

O'Connor v. Lafayette City Council, 19-cv-1066-WJM-KLM. (2020)

Court: District Court, D. Colorado Number: infdco20200303a72 Visitors: 15
Filed: Mar. 02, 2020
Latest Update: Mar. 02, 2020
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING AS-MODIFIED RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE WILLIAM J. MART NEZ , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix (the "Recommendation") (ECF No. 80), recommending that Plaintiff Cliff Smedley's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 49) and Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Smedley's Claims (ECF No. 60) (together, the "Motions") be granted. The Recommendation is incorporated herein by reference. See 28 U.S.C.
More

ORDER ADOPTING AS-MODIFIED RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

This matter is before the Court on the Recommendation of U.S. Magistrate Judge Kristen L. Mix (the "Recommendation") (ECF No. 80), recommending that Plaintiff Cliff Smedley's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 49) and Defendants' Motion to Dismiss Smedley's Claims (ECF No. 60) (together, the "Motions") be granted. The Recommendation is incorporated herein by reference. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). For the reasons that follow, the Recommendation is adopted as modified.

The Court assumes familiarity with the allegations and claims involved in this case as explicated in the Court's previous Order (ECF No. 81). The instant Motions constitute a stipulation on the part of Smedley and Defendants to dismiss all of Smedley's claims without prejudice, so that he may refile his claims in a separate action. (ECF Nos. 49 & 60.) The Court's previous Order, however, dismissed Smedley's Title VII and ADEA claims with prejudice, and dismissed his First Amendment claim without prejudice. (ECF No. 181.) Given that the relief sought in the Motions has already been granted in the Court's prior Order (ECF No. 81), the Recommendation (ECF No. 80) will be adopted as modified, and Smedley's Motion (ECF No. 49) and Defendants' Motion (ECF No. 60) will be denied as moot.

The Court accordingly ORDERS as follows:

1. The Recommendation (ECF No. 80) is ADOPTED AS MODIFIED; and

2. Plaintiff Smedley's Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 49) and Defendants' Motion to Dismiss (ECF No. 60) are DENIED AS MOOT.

Source:  Leagle

Can't find what you're looking for?

Post a free question on our public forum.
Ask a Question
Search for lawyers by practice areas.
Find a Lawyer