Truman v. Orem City, 2:17-CV-775 TS. (2019)
Court: District Court, D. Utah
Number: infdco20190508867
Visitors: 12
Filed: Apr. 30, 2019
Latest Update: Apr. 30, 2019
Summary: MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTION TO ORDER OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE TED STEWART , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on Defendants' Objection to the Magistrate Judge's Decision. On February 22, 2019, Magistrate Judge Furse granted in part and denied in part a motion to quash a subpoena filed by Ronald Yengich—Plaintiff's former counsel. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a), a district judge reviewing a magistrate judge's order on nondispositive matters "mus
Summary: MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTION TO ORDER OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE TED STEWART , District Judge . This matter is before the Court on Defendants' Objection to the Magistrate Judge's Decision. On February 22, 2019, Magistrate Judge Furse granted in part and denied in part a motion to quash a subpoena filed by Ronald Yengich—Plaintiff's former counsel. Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a), a district judge reviewing a magistrate judge's order on nondispositive matters "must..
More
MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER OVERRULING OBJECTION TO ORDER OF MAGISTRATE JUDGE
TED STEWART, District Judge.
This matter is before the Court on Defendants' Objection to the Magistrate Judge's Decision. On February 22, 2019, Magistrate Judge Furse granted in part and denied in part a motion to quash a subpoena filed by Ronald Yengich—Plaintiff's former counsel.
Under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 72(a), a district judge reviewing a magistrate judge's order on nondispositive matters "must consider timely objections and modify or set aside any part of the order that is clearly erroneous or is contrary to law."1 This requires that the Court be "left with the definite and firm conviction that a mistake has been committed."2
In this case, Defendants have failed to demonstrate that Judge Furse's decision was clearly erroneous or contrary to law.
It is therefore
ORDERED that Defendants' Objection to Magistrate Judge Decision (Docket No. 79) is OVERRULED. It is further
ORDERED that Plaintiff supplement his privilege log in compliance with Magistrate Judge Furse's Decision (Docket No. 78) within 15 days of this Order.
FootNotes
1. See also, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(A) ("A judge of the court may reconsider any pretrial matter under this subparagraph (A) where it has been shown that the magistrate judge's order is clearly erroneous or contrary to law.").
2. Ocelot Oil Corp. v. Sparrow Indus., 847 F.2d 1458, 1464 (10th Cir. 1988) (quoting United States v. United States Gypsum Co., 333 U.S. 364, 395 (1948)).
Source: Leagle
