U.S. v. HARVEY, 04-cv-72180. (2017)
Court: District Court, E.D. Michigan
Number: infdco20170512d27
Visitors: 7
Filed: May 11, 2017
Latest Update: May 11, 2017
Summary: ORDER (1) ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE WHALEN'S APRIL 10, 2017 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF NO. 129); (2) DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY WRIT OF GARNISHMENT AND FOR EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ECF NO. 115), AND (3) ORDERING DEFENDANT TO OBTAIN LEAVE OF COURT TO FILE ANY FURTHER MOTION WITH REGARD TO GARNISHMENT OF THE PIC GROUP, INC. PAUL D. BORMAN , District Judge . On April 10, 2017, Magistrate Judge Steven R. Whalen issued a Report and Recommendation to DENY Defendant's Motion to Stay Writ o
Summary: ORDER (1) ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE WHALEN'S APRIL 10, 2017 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF NO. 129); (2) DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY WRIT OF GARNISHMENT AND FOR EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ECF NO. 115), AND (3) ORDERING DEFENDANT TO OBTAIN LEAVE OF COURT TO FILE ANY FURTHER MOTION WITH REGARD TO GARNISHMENT OF THE PIC GROUP, INC. PAUL D. BORMAN , District Judge . On April 10, 2017, Magistrate Judge Steven R. Whalen issued a Report and Recommendation to DENY Defendant's Motion to Stay Writ of..
More
ORDER (1) ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE WHALEN'S APRIL 10, 2017 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF NO. 129); (2) DENYING DEFENDANT'S MOTION TO STAY WRIT OF GARNISHMENT AND FOR EVIDENTIARY HEARING (ECF NO. 115), AND (3) ORDERING DEFENDANT TO OBTAIN LEAVE OF COURT TO FILE ANY FURTHER MOTION WITH REGARD TO GARNISHMENT OF THE PIC GROUP, INC.
PAUL D. BORMAN, District Judge.
On April 10, 2017, Magistrate Judge Steven R. Whalen issued a Report and Recommendation to DENY Defendant's Motion to Stay Writ of Garnishment and to Conduct A Show Cause and Evidentiary Hearing. The Magistrate Judge further recommended that Defendant be required to obtain leave of Court before filing any further motion with regard to the garnishment of his employer, the PIC Group, Inc. (ECF No. 129, Report and Recommendation.) Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation, and there being no timely objections under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and E.D. Mich L. R. 72.1(d), the Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 129), and DENIES Defendant's Motion (ECF No. 115).
The Court FURTHER ORDERS that Defendant must obtain leave of Court before filing any further motion with regard to the garnishment of his employer, PIC Group, Inc.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
