Jones v. Village of Golf Manor, 1:18-cv-403. (2020)
Court: District Court, S.D. Ohio
Number: infdco20200311891
Visitors: 7
Filed: Mar. 05, 2020
Latest Update: Mar. 05, 2020
Summary: ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS (DOC. 57), ADOPTING REPORTING AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. 56), GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS (DOC. 51) AND TERMINATING CASE MATTHEW W. McFARLAND , District Judge . This action is before the Court on Plaintiffs James and Darlene Jones's Objections (Doc. 57) to Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman's Report and Recommendations (Doc. 56). Magistrate Judge Bowman recommended that the Court grant the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc.
Summary: ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS (DOC. 57), ADOPTING REPORTING AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. 56), GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS (DOC. 51) AND TERMINATING CASE MATTHEW W. McFARLAND , District Judge . This action is before the Court on Plaintiffs James and Darlene Jones's Objections (Doc. 57) to Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman's Report and Recommendations (Doc. 56). Magistrate Judge Bowman recommended that the Court grant the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 5..
More
ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTIONS (DOC. 57), ADOPTING REPORTING AND RECOMMENDATIONS (DOC. 56), GRANTING DEFENDANTS' MOTION FOR JUDGMENT ON THE PLEADINGS (DOC. 51) AND TERMINATING CASE
MATTHEW W. McFARLAND, District Judge.
This action is before the Court on Plaintiffs James and Darlene Jones's Objections (Doc. 57) to Magistrate Judge Stephanie K. Bowman's Report and Recommendations (Doc. 56). Magistrate Judge Bowman recommended that the Court grant the Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 51) filed by Defendants Matt Brettcher, Sharon Chaney, Stephan Densmore, Brenda DuBose, Ron Hirth, Lou Marx, Greg Schwartzberg, and Village of Golf Manor ("Defendants"), and dismiss this case. Plaintiffs failed to file their Objections (Doc. 57) to the Report and Recommendations within the fourteen-day period permitted under Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). In the interest of justice, however, the Court has considered the Objections and Defendants' Response (Doc. 59) to them.
As required by 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(b), the Court made a de novo review of the record in this case. Upon said review, the Court finds that Plaintiffs' Objections (Doc. 57) are not well-taken and accordingly are OVERRULED. The Court ADOPTS the Report and Recommendations (Doc. 56) in its entirety and GRANTS Defendants' Motion for Judgment on the Pleadings (Doc. 51). This case is hereby TERMINATED on the Court's docket.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Source: Leagle
