Harrington v. Creditors Specialty Service, Inc., No. 2:2009cv00907 - Document 16 (E.D. Cal. 2009)

Court Description: ORDER ADOPTING FINDINGS and RECOMMENDATIONS 14 , in full, signed by Judge John A. Mendez on 8/31/2009. Plaintiff's 10 Motion for Default Judgment against defendant Creditors Specialty Service is GRANTED and upon plaintiff's filing of voluntary dismissal of his Supplemental State Law Invasion of Privacy Claim, Judgment is entered in amount of $5,439.00. (Marciel, M)

Download PDF
Harrington v. Creditors Specialty Service, Inc. Doc. 16 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 9 FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 10 DAVID HARRINGTON, 11 Plaintiff, 12 13 No. CIV S-09-0907 JAM EFB vs. CREDITORS SPECIALITY SERVICE, INC., 14 Defendant. ORDER 15 __________________________________/ 16 17 Plaintiff’s motion for entry of default judgment came on regularly for hearing 18 before the assigned magistrate judge on June 24, 2009. The matter was referred to a United 19 States Magistrate Judge pursuant to Local Rule 72-302(c)(19) and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). 20 On July 8, 2009, the magistrate judge filed findings and recommendations herein 21 which were served on the parties and which contained notice to the parties that any objections to 22 the findings and recommendations were to be filed within ten days. No objections were filed. 23 The court has reviewed the file and finds the findings and recommendations to be 24 supported by the record and by the magistrate judge's analysis. Accordingly, IT IS HEREBY 25 ORDERED that: 26 //// 1 Dockets.Justia.com 1 1. The Findings and Recommendations filed July 8, 2009, are adopted in full; 2 2. Plaintiff’s motion for default judgment against defendant Creditors Specialty 3 4 Service, Inc. is GRANTED; and 3. Upon the plaintiff’s filing of a voluntary dismissal of his supplemental state 5 law invasion of privacy claim, judgment is entered in the amount of $5,439.00. 6 DATED: August 31, 2009 7 8 /s/ John A. Mendez 9 U. S. District Court Judge 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 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.