STRUCKMAN v. ADDYSTON POLICE DEPARTMENT, 1:12-cv-184. (2015)
Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20150121a96
Visitors: 3
Filed: Jan. 20, 2015
Latest Update: Jan. 20, 2015
Summary: DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 42) TIMOTHY S. BLACK, District Judge. This case is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz (previously Hon. J. Gregory Wehrman). Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings filed with this Court and, on Decem
Summary: DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 42) TIMOTHY S. BLACK, District Judge. This case is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz (previously Hon. J. Gregory Wehrman). Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings filed with this Court and, on Decemb..
More
DECISION AND ENTRY ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION OF THE UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE (Doc. 42)
TIMOTHY S. BLACK, District Judge.
This case is before the Court pursuant to the Order of General Reference in the United States District Court for the Southern District of Ohio Western Division to United States Magistrate Judge Karen L. Litkovitz (previously Hon. J. Gregory Wehrman). Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings filed with this Court and, on December 8, 2014, submitted a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 42). Remaining Defendant Brandon Goff filed objections (Doc. 43).
As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b), the Court has reviewed the comprehensive findings of the Magistrate Judge and considered de novo all of the filings in this matter. Upon consideration of the foregoing, the Court does determine that such Report and Recommendation should be and is hereby adopted in its entirety.
Accordingly:
1. The Report and Recommendation (Doc. 42) is ADOPTED; and
2. Defendant Brandon Goff's Motion for Summary Judgment (Doc. 37) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
