Brockbank et al v. Wells Fargo et al, No. 1:2013cv00147 - Document 30 (D. Utah 2014)
Court Description: MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ADOPTING 16 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS; granting 8 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim, 9 Motion to Dismiss for Lack of Jurisdiction, 14 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Clai m - Plaintiffs' complaint is dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiffs may file an Amended Complaint, correcting the deficiencies associated with their original complaint (as set forth in the Report and Recommendation), on or before 6/25/14. Signed by Judge David Nuffer on 6/4/14. (alt)
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF UTAH, NORTHERN DIVISION DONNAMAY BROCKBANK, DENNIS L. MOSES, Plaintiff, MEMORANDUM DECISION AND ORDER ADOPTING REPORT & RECOMMENDATION v. Case No. 1:13-cv-147-DN-BCW WELLS FARGO, N.A., ETITLE INSURANCE AGENCY, DAVID E. ADAMS II, and DOES 1 THROUGH 30, District Judge David Nuffer Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells Defendants. Magistrate Judge Brooke Wells's Report and Recommendation 1 under 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b)(1)(B) recommends granting the motions to dismiss filed by each of the respective Defendants. 2 In response, Plaintiffs filed an "Objection to Report and Recommendation and Request for Oral Argument. Motion for the Right to File with the Court. And Motion for the Right to Serve Defendants in this Case. By the Use of Email as Approved by the Court that Would Allow for Verification and Guarantee that Proper Service was Accomplished." (the "Objection"). 3 Plaintiffs' Objection does not present any compelling legal argument to reject the Report and Recommendation. Instead, the Objection denies certain statements or paragraphs of the Report and Recommendation, but fails to support these denials with any admissible evidence or legal argument. Plaintiffs also request oral argument because Plaintiffs "do much better face-toface in open court hearing" as opposed to written submissions. 1 Docket no. 16, entered February 27, 2014. 2 Docket nos. 8, 9, and 14, filed December 8, 2013, December 9, 2013, and January 29, 2014, respectively. 3 Docket no. 17, filed March 14, 2014. After review of all relevant materials de novo, it is clear that the Report and Recommendation should be adopted in its entirety. For all of the reasons set forth in the Report and Recommendation, Defendants' motions to dismiss are GRANTED and Plaintiffs' Complaint is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. Plaintiffs may file an Amended Complaint on or before June 25, 2014. Plaintiffs' Amended Complaint shall correct the deficiencies associated with their original complaint (as set forth in the Report and Recommendation). Failure to file an Amended Complaint that corrects these deficiencies on or before June 25, 2014 shall result in dismissal with prejudice. Signed June 4, 2014. BY THE COURT: ________________________________________ David Nuffer 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.
