UNITED STATES FIRE INSURANCE CO. v. WATERFRONT ASSOCIATES, INC., 1:15cv46. (2017)
Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20170321d36
Visitors: 15
Filed: Mar. 20, 2017
Latest Update: Mar. 20, 2017
Summary: ORDER SUSAN J. DLOTT , District Judge . This matter 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 Stephanie K. Bowman. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings and filed with this Court on November 8, 2016 a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 48). Subsequently, the defendant filed objections to such Report and Recommendation (D
Summary: ORDER SUSAN J. DLOTT , District Judge . This matter 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 Stephanie K. Bowman. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings and filed with this Court on November 8, 2016 a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 48). Subsequently, the defendant filed objections to such Report and Recommendation (Do..
More
ORDER
SUSAN J. DLOTT, District Judge.
This matter 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 Stephanie K. Bowman. Pursuant to such reference, the Magistrate Judge reviewed the pleadings and filed with this Court on November 8, 2016 a Report and Recommendation (Doc. 48). Subsequently, the defendant filed objections to such Report and Recommendation (Doc. 49) and plaintiff filed a response to the objections (Doc. 51).
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 Recommendation should be adopted.
Accordingly, C&B's motion to compel arbitration and to dismiss the case (Doc. 41) is DENIED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
