Zarrelli v. City of Norfolk, No. 2:2013cv00447 - Document 38 (E.D. Va. 2014)

Court Description: FINAL ORDER: granting 24 Motion to Dismiss; adopting Report and Recommendations re 33 Report and Recommendations.; granting 4 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim; granting 21 Motion to Dismiss for Failure to State a Claim. The court, having examined the Plaintiff's Objections to the R&R, and having made de novo findings with respect thereto,overrules the Plaintiff's Objections, and does hereby adopt and approve in full the findings and recommendations set forth in the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge filed on May 22, 2014. The court GRANTS the Defendants' Motions to Dismiss. (See footnotes for specfics). Copies sent to counsel of record as directed on 6/23/2014. Signed by Chief District Judge Rebecca Beach Smith and filed on 6/23/2014. (bgra)

Download PDF

Zarrelli v. City of Norfolk Doc. 38 UNITED STATES EASTERN DISTRICT DISTRICT OF FILED COURT VIRGINIA Norfolk Division REGINA M. JUN 2 3 2014 CLERK, US DISTRICT COURT ZARRELLI, NORFOLK, VA Plaintiff, ACTION v. CITY OF NORFOLK, et NO. 2:13cv447 M. Zarrelli, al . , Defendants FINAL On August 12, 2013, ORDER the Plaintiff, Regina filed a Complaint alleging constitutional due process violations and defamation under September 11, 2013, Motion to Dismiss. referred to 2013. 4. law. the City of On October 8, Judge ("R&R"), ECF No. recommended granting state Defendant, ECF No. Magistrate Recommendation October 31, the Virginia Douglas ECF 9. No. 8, proposed Motion Amended for the Motion to Dismiss. Leave Complaint, to File ECF granted by Order of February 4, an No. 2014. On filed a a Report and was filed on Magistrate Judge Miller 2013. the court could rule on the objection to a 1. the Motion was for which In the R&R, No. Norfolk, 2013, Miller an objection to the R&R on November 14, filed ECF The Plaintiff filed ECF No. the R&R, Amended 14, which ECF No. 10. the Plaintiff Complaint leave 18. Before the and a court The court also Dockets.Justia.com sustained the objection to the first R&R in that same Order. See id. In her Amended Complaint, the same claims as substantive changes. of Norfolk's February 25, Dismiss, a No. 26. the 21, Both a Motions hearing to Federal to the Rule May 7, 2014, Motions again Magistrate recommended Dismiss. of 28 U.S.C. Judge the ECF No. 72(b). held their 9, 2014, right the Miller's By Magistrate Judge the copy to Plaintiff Report Motion to to 2014, Mr. Dismiss. United ECF States March 21, 2014, ECF a No. and 27. hearing on On both 32. granting 33. On § 636(b)(1)(B) Miller ECF No. the City Underwood filed to referred Procedure a March 18, Motion City of and also recommended granting Mr. advised of Judge Civil May 22, 2014, Dismiss, June of On his were Mr. no Defendant. filed Miller by Order of provisions to Dismiss. On E. a 2014, 24. on Dismiss as Norfolk No. with Gregory Underwood, and on March 18, Magistrate Judge Douglas pursuant of ECF the Plaintiff alleged Complaint, Attorney, City Dismiss. requested 19, original She did add Mr. 2014, to Underwood her Commonwealth ECF No. Motion in ECF No. and file of the filed an Norfolk's R&R, and Motion to Underwood's Motion to R&R, the parties written objections filed her Objections Recommendation, ECF were thereto. to No. On Magistrate 34, and requested a hearing to address her objections on June 17, 2 014. ECF No. 36.1 The Plaintiff's objections to the R&R reiterate the same arguments presented in her original Complaint and Amended Complaint. Pursuant Procedure, entirety, of the to the Rule 72(b) court, of having the Federal reviewed the Rules of record Civil in its shall make a de novo determination of those portions R&R to which the Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b). Plaintiff has specifically The court may accept, reject, objected. or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation of the magistrate judge, or recommit the matter to him with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). The court, having examined the Plaintiff's Objections to the R&R, and having made de novo findings with respect thereto, overrules the Plaintiff's Objections, approve in full the findings and does hereby adopt and and recommendations set forth in the Report and Recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge filed on May 22, 2014. Accordingly, Defendants' 1 After full has the court GRANTS the Motions to Dismiss. examination of determined that the briefs a hearing is and the record, unnecessary, as the the court facts and legal arguments are adequately presented, and the decisional process would not be aided significantly by oral argument. See Fed. R. Civ. P. 78(b); Local Civ. R. 7(J). The Clerk shall forward a copy of this Final Order to counsel for the parties. IT IS SO ORDERED. /S/ Rebecca Beach Smith Chief __n United States District Judge -OpREBECCA BEACH SMITH CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE June P- 2" 14

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.