Davison et al v. Foremost Insurance Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan, No. 3:2020cv01387 - Document 24 (D. Or. 2021)

Court Description: Opinion and Order: Upon review, I agree with Judge Acosta's findings and recommendation, and I ADOPT the F. & R. [ECF 22 ] as my own opinion. I GRANT Plaintiffs' Partial Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF 5 ] and DENY Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF 14 ]. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 24th day of June, 2021, by United States District Judge Michael W. Mosman. (pjg)

Download PDF
Davison et al v. Foremost Insurance Company, Grand Rapids, Michigan Doc. 24 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION JAMES DAVISON et al., Plaintiffs, v. No. 3:20-cv-01387-AC FOREMOST INSURANCE COMPANY, GRAND RAPIDS, MICHIGAN, OPINION AND ORDER Defendant. MOSMAN,J., On June 1, 2021, Magistrate Judge John V. Acosta issued his Findings and Recommendation (F. & R.) [ECF 22]. Judge Acosta recommended that I grant Plaintiffs' Partial Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF 5] and deny Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF 14]. No objections were filed. Upon review, I agree with Judge Acosta. DISCUSSION The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any party may file written objections. The court is not bound by the recommendations of the magistrate judge, but retains responsibility for making the final determination. The court is generally required to make a de novo determination regarding those portions of the report or specified findings or recommendation as to which an objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(C). However, the court is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of 1 - OPINION AND ORDER Dockets.Justia.com the magistrate judge as to those portions of the F. & R. to whieh no objections are addressed. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). While the level of scrutiny under which I am required to review the F. & R. depends on whether or not objections have been filed, in either case, I am free to accept, reject, or modify any part of the F. & R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(C). CONCLUSION Upon review, I agree with Judge Acosta's findings and recommendation, and I ADOPT the F. & R. [ECF 22] as my own opinion. I GRANT Plaintiffs' Partial Motion for Summruy Judgment [ECF 5] and DENY Defendant's Motion for Summary Judgment [ECF 14]. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this 2 - OPINION AND ORDER

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.