ONE AND KEN VALLEY HOUSING GROUP et al v. MAINE STATE HOUSING AUTHORITY, No. 1:2009cv00642 - Document 129 (D. Me. 2012)

Court Description: ORDER AFFIRMING RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE adopting Report and Recommended Decision re 116 Report and Recommendations for 87 Motion for Summary Judgment, 88 Motion for Summary Judgment, 89 Motion for Summary Judgment & 90 Motion for Summary Judgment. By JUDGE D. BROCK HORNBY. (mnw)

Download PDF
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF MAINE ONE AND KEN VALLEY HOUSING ) GROUP, ET AL., ) ) PLAINTIFFS ) ) v. ) ) MAINE STATE HOUSING ) AUTHORITY, ) ) ) DEFENDANT AND THIRD-PARTY PLAINTIFF ) ) V. ) ) SHAUN DONOVAN, Secretary, ) United States Department of ) Housing & Urban Development, ) ) THIRD-PARTY DEFENDANT ) CIVIL NO. 1:09-cv-642-DBH ORDER AFFIRMING RECOMMENDED DECISION OF THE MAGISTRATE JUDGE On April 17, 2012, the United States Magistrate Judge filed with the court, with copies to counsel, her Recommended Decision on the parties motions for summary judgment. The plaintiffs filed their objection to the Recommended Decision on May 4, 2012, and the defendant Maine State Housing Authority filed its objection on the same date. Oral argument was held on July 16, 2012. I have reviewed and considered the Recommended Decision, together with the entire record; I have made a de novo determination of all matters adjudicated by the Recommended Decision; and I concur with the recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge for the reasons set forth in the Recommended Decision, and determine that no further proceeding is necessary. It is therefore ORDERED that the Recommended Decision of the Magistrate Judge is hereby ADOPTED. Summary judgment is GRANTED to the defendants Maine State Housing Authority and the United States Department for Housing and Urban Development. The plaintiffs motion for summary judgment is DENIED. SO ORDERED. DATED THIS 20TH DAY OF JULY, 2012 /s/D. Brock Hornby D. BROCK HORNBY UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.