Leach v. Wehling

S.D. Alabama

Leach v. Wehling

DecidedApril 5, 2019

Docket1:18-cv-00454

StatusUnknown

This text of Leach v. Wehling (Leach v. Wehling) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, S.D. Alabama primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.

Bluebook

Leach v. Wehling, (S.D. Ala. 2019).

Pincite

Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION

DAVID LEACH, Personal ) Representative of the Estate of ) Henry S. Lockett, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 18-00454-KD-MU ) MARY WEHLING, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ORDER After due and proper consideration of the issues raised, and a de novo determination of those portions of the recommendation to which objection is made, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and dated January 29, 2019, is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. Accordingly, Defendant Region Bank’s Rule 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint (doc. 11) is GRANTED and this action is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Stalley ex rel. U.S. v. Orlando Regional Healthcare Sys., Inc., 524 F.3d 1229, 1232 (11th Cir. 2008) (per curiam) (dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction “is not a judgment on the merits and is entered without prejudice.”). DONE and ORDERED this the 5th day of April 2019. /s Kristi K. DuBose KRISTI K. DuBOSE CHIEF UNITED STATES

Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ALABAMA SOUTHERN DIVISION

DAVID LEACH, Personal ) Representative of the Estate of ) Henry S. Lockett, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) CIVIL ACTION NO. 18-00454-KD-MU ) MARY WEHLING, et al., ) ) Defendants. ) ORDER After due and proper consideration of the issues raised, and a de novo determination of those portions of the recommendation to which objection is made, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge made under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and dated January 29, 2019, is ADOPTED as the opinion of this Court. Accordingly, Defendant Region Bank’s Rule 12(b)(1) motion to dismiss Plaintiff’s complaint (doc. 11) is GRANTED and this action is dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction. See Stalley ex rel. U.S. v. Orlando Regional Healthcare Sys., Inc., 524 F.3d 1229, 1232 (11th Cir. 2008) (per curiam) (dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction “is not a judgment on the merits and is entered without prejudice.”). DONE and ORDERED this the 5th day of April 2019. /s Kristi K. DuBose KRISTI K. DuBOSE CHIEF UNITED STATES

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack

Bluebook (online)

Leach v. Wehling, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/leach-v-wehling-alsd-2019.

Opinion

Related

Cite This Page — Counsel Stack