Larango v. Wolfe (PLR1), No. 3:2015cv00352 - Document 20 (E.D. Tenn. 2016)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM OPINION in support of the following Judgment. Signed by District Judge Pamela L Reeves on 10/11/16. (ADA)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
Larango v. Wolfe (PLR1) Doc. 20 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF TENNESSEE AT KNOXVILLE SHANE LARANGO, Plaintiff, v. JASON WOLFE, Defendant. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) No.:3:15-CV-352-PLR-CCS MEMORANDUM OPINION This matter is before the court on two Reports and Recommendations filed by United States Magistrate Judge, C. Clifford Shirley [R. 12, 18]. There have been no timely objections to the Reports and Recommendations, and enough time has passed since the filing of the Reports and Recommendations to treat any objections as having been waived. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). After a careful review of this matter, the Court is in complete agreement with Magistrate Judge Shirley’s recommendations. Accordingly, the Court ACCEPTS IN WHOLE the Reports and Recommendations under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b). It is ORDERED, for the reasons stated in the Reports and Recommendations, which the Court adopts and incorporates into its ruling that: 1. Default judgment is entered against defendant Jason Wolfe, finding in favor of plaintiff Shane Larango on plaintiff’s claims for violation of the Lanham Act, 15 Dockets.Justia.com U.S.C. § 1951, et seq; violation of the Tennessee Consumer Protection Act, Tenn. Code Ann. § 47-18-10, et seq; breach of contract and fraud. 2. Plaintiff Shane Larango shall recover from defendant Jason Wolfe the sum of $88,324.32, plus reasonable attorney’s fees and costs, and post judgment interest. 3. Counsel’s Financial Affidavit [R. 19] is referred to the Honorable C. Clifford Shirley, United States Magistrate Judge, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and the Rules of this Court, for disposition or for a report and recommendation as may be appropriate. Enter: . 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.
