Cotropia v. Chapman, H-16-0742. (2019)
Court: District Court, S.D. Texas
Number: infdco20190916469
Visitors: 6
Filed: Sep. 12, 2019
Latest Update: Sep. 12, 2019
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION SIM LAKE , Senior District Judge . Pending before the court are the Magistrate Judge's Memorandum and Recommendation (Docket Entry No. 73) and Plaintiff Joseph Cotropia's Written Objections to the Magistrate's Memorandum and Recommendation (Docket Entry No. 74). The court must review de novo portions of the Magistrate Judge's proposed findings and recommendations on dispositive matters to which the parties have filed specific, written objection
Summary: ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION SIM LAKE , Senior District Judge . Pending before the court are the Magistrate Judge's Memorandum and Recommendation (Docket Entry No. 73) and Plaintiff Joseph Cotropia's Written Objections to the Magistrate's Memorandum and Recommendation (Docket Entry No. 74). The court must review de novo portions of the Magistrate Judge's proposed findings and recommendations on dispositive matters to which the parties have filed specific, written objections..
More
ORDER ADOPTING MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
SIM LAKE, Senior District Judge.
Pending before the court are the Magistrate Judge's Memorandum and Recommendation (Docket Entry No. 73) and Plaintiff Joseph Cotropia's Written Objections to the Magistrate's Memorandum and Recommendation (Docket Entry No. 74).
The court must review de novo portions of the Magistrate Judge's proposed findings and recommendations on dispositive matters to which the parties have filed specific, written objections. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
The court has reviewed plaintiff's objections and concludes that the purported fact issue of whether Chapman took the subpoenaed records from Cotropia's receptionist or was given the records is immaterial to the court's determination that Chapman was entitled to qualified immunity for the seizure of the documents pursuant to the instanter subpoena. Plaintiff's objections are therefore OVERRULED, and the Memorandum and Recommendation is ADOPTED by the court.
Source: Leagle
