Moslow v. City Of Southaven, Mississippi
This text of Moslow v. City Of Southaven, Mississippi (Moslow v. City Of Southaven, Mississippi) is published on Counsel Stack Legal Research, covering District Court, N.D. Mississippi primary law. Counsel Stack provides free access to over 12 million legal documents including statutes, case law, regulations, and constitutions.
Opinion
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF MISSISSIPPI OXFORD DIVISION
DAVID WARRAN MOSLOW, JR. PLAINTIFFS and SUZANNE MOSLOW
V. NO. 3:24-CV-55-DMB-RP
CITY OF SOUTHAVEN, MISSISSIPPI, et al. DEFENDANTS
ORDER
On November 21, 2024, United States Magistrate Judge Roy Percy issued a “Report and Recommendation” (“R&R”) recommending that Officer D. Moore be dismissed without prejudice.1 Doc. #115. The R&R warned that “failure to file written objections to the proposed findings, conclusions, and recommendations in [the R&R] within 14 days after being served with a copy bars … (1) entitlement to de novo review by a district judge of proposed findings and recommendations, … and (2) appellate review, except on grounds of plain error, of unobjected-to proposed factual findings and legal conclusions accept[ed] by the district court.” Id. at PageID 4528–29 (emphasis in original) (citations omitted). No objection to the R&R was filed. Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C), “[a] judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report … to which objection is made.” “[P]lain error review applies where a party did not object to a magistrate judge’s findings of fact, conclusions of law, or recommendation to the district court despite being served with notice of the consequences of failing to object.” Quintero v. State of Tex. — Health and Hum. Servs. Comm’n, No. 22-50916, 2023 WL 5236785, at *2 (5th Cir. Aug. 15, 2023) (cleaned up). “[W]here there is no objection,
1 The recommendation is based on the plaintiffs’ failure to serve Moore “despite multiple extensions to do so.” Doc. #115 at PageID 4528. the Court need only determine whether the report and recommendation is clearly erroneous or contrary to law.” United States v. Alaniz, 278 F. Supp. 3d 944, 948 (S.D. Tex. 2017). Because the Court reviewed the R&R for plain error and concludes the R&R is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law, the R&R [115] is ADOPTED as the order of the Court.
Officer D. Moore is DISMISSED without prejudice. SO ORDERED, this 9th day of December, 2024. /s/Debra M. Brown UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
Free access — add to your briefcase to read the full text and ask questions with AI
Related
Cite This Page — Counsel Stack
Moslow v. City Of Southaven, Mississippi, Counsel Stack Legal Research, https://law.counselstack.com/opinion/moslow-v-city-of-southaven-mississippi-msnd-2024.