Davis et al v. Detroit, City of et al, No. 2:2015cv10547 - Document 101 (E.D. Mich. 2016)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER Adopting 99 Report and Recommendation Granting in Part and Denying in Part 65 Motion for Default Judgment, filed by Hatema Davis, Timothy Davis. Signed by District Judge Paul D. Borman. (DTof)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Davis et al v. Detroit, City of et al Doc. 101 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF MICHIGAN SOUTHERN DIVISION TIMOTHY DAVIS AND HATEMA DAVIS, Plaintiffs, Case No. 15-10547 v. Paul D. Borman United States District Judge CITY OF DETROIT, ET AL., David R. Grand United States Magistrate Judge Defendants. ______________________________/ OPINION AND ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE’S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION (ECF NO. 99) AND GRANTING IN PART AND DENYING IN PART PLAINTIFFS’ RENEWED MOTION FOR DEFAULT JUDGMENT AS TO THE CITY OF DETROIT (ECF NO. 65) Now before the Court is Magistrate Judge David R. Grand’s Report and Recommendation recommending that the Court grant in part and deny in part Plaintiffs’ Renewed Motion for Default Judgment as to the City of Detroit. (ECF No. 99, Report and Recommendation). Magistrate Judge Grand recommended denying in part Plaintiffs’ Renewed Motion for Default Judgment against the City of Detroit to the extent Plaintiffs sought an entry of default judgment against Defendant City of Detroit, but granting in part to the extent Plaintiffs sought monetary sanctions against Defendant City of Detroit. Magistrate Judge Grand concluded that Plaintiffs should be awarded the reasonable fees and costs they incurred with filing the underlying motion, including “(1) preparing the motion and supporting briefs (Docs. 65, 82, 84); (2) preparing for and attending the June 7, 2016 hearing on their motion for default judgment; and (3) preparing for an attending the August 1, 2016 evidentiary hearing regarding this motion.” (Report and Recommendation, at * 11.) Neither Plaintiffs nor Defendants filed Dockets.Justia.com objections to the Report and Recommendation. Having reviewed the Report and Recommendation, and there being no timely objections from either party under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and E.D. Mich L.R. 72.1(b), the Court ADOPTS the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 99) and GRANTS IN PART and DENIES IN PART Plaintiffs’ Renewed Motion for Default Judgment as to the City of Detroit (ECF No. 65). IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Paul D. Borman PAUL D. BORMAN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Dated: October 19, 2016 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE The undersigned certifies that a copy of the foregoing order was served upon each attorney or party of record herein by electronic means or first class U.S. mail on October 19, 2016. s/Deborah Tofil Case Manager 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.
