Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Avalon Condo. Ass'n, Inc. v. SECURA Ins.

United States District Court, D. Colorado

November 18, 2014

AVALON CONDOMINIUM ASSOCIATION, INC., Plaintiff,
v.
SECURA INSURANCE, a mutual company, Defendant

For Avalon Condominium Association, Inc, Plaintiff: Wes P. Wollenweber, LEAD ATTORNEY, Ciancio Ciancio & Brown, P.C-Broomfield, Broomfield, CO; Robert William Loree, Loree & Lipscomb, San Antonio, TX.

For SECURA Insurance, a Mutual Company, Defendant: Jennifer Lynn White, Craig William Cain, Cain & White, LLP, Colorado Springs, CO.

ORDER AFFIRMING OCTOBER 30, 2014 RECOMMENDATION OF UNITED STATES MAGISTRATE JUDGE

CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO, United States District Judge. Judge Christine M. Arguello.

This matter is before the Court on the October 30, 2014 Recommendation (Doc. # 63) by United States Magistrate Judge Kathleen M. Tafoya that Plaintiff Avalon Condominium Association's Motion to Amend Complaint (Doc. # 32) be denied. The Recommendation is incorporated herein by reference. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b).

The Recommendation advised the parties that specific written objections were due within fourteen (14) days after being served with a copy of the Recommendation. (Doc. # 63 at 7-8.) Despite this advisement, no objections to Magistrate Judge Tafoya's Recommendation were filed by either party. " In the absence of timely objection, the district court may review a magistrate [judge's] report under any standard it deems appropriate." Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991) (citing Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 150, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985) (stating that " [i]t does not appear that Congress intended to require district court review of a magistrate's factual or legal conclusions, under a de novo or any other standard, when neither party objects to those findings.").

The Court has reviewed all the relevant pleadings concerning Plaintiff's Motion to Amend Complaint and the Recommendation. Based on this review, the Court concludes that Magistrate Judge Tafoya's thorough and comprehensive analysis and recommendation is correct and that " there is no clear error on the face of the record." Fed.R.Civ.P. 72 advisory committee's note. Therefore, the Court ADOPTS the Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Tafoya as the findings and conclusions of this Court.

Accordingly, it is ORDERED that the Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge (Doc. # 63) is AFFIRMED and ADOPTED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that Plaintiff's Motion to Amend Complaint (Doc. # 32) is DENIED.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.