CAIN v. BOVIS LEND LEASE, INC. (D.Or. 9-13-2011)

Citation Codes

Equivalent Citations

citation codes

Docket Number

No. CV. 09-723-HU.

Motions

Motion for partial summary judgment : Granted

Motion for summary judgment : In Part

Attorney(S)

Ernest J. Simmons, Portland, OR, Karen R. Thompson, Portland, OR, Robert K. Udziela, Portland, OR, Attorneys for Plaintiffs. John J. Soltys, William F. Knowles, Ramona N. Hunter, COZEN O'CONNOR, Seattle, WA, Attorneys for Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff Bovis Lend Lease, Inc. Steven P. Jones, Karen V. Wiggins, KEATING JONES HUGHES PC, Portland, OR, Attorneys for Defendant and Third-Party Plaintiff Willamette Valley Medical Center, LLC. Matthew C. Casey, BULLIVANT HOUSER BAILEY, PC, Portland, OR, Attorney for Third-Party Defendant Wylie Steel Fabricators, Inc. Angela M. Otto, Tyler J. Storti, STEWART SOKOL GRAY LLC, Portland, OR, Attorneys for Third-Party Defendant Earl Swensson Associates, Inc.

Acts

Judiciary And Judicial Procedure — United States Magistrate Judges — Court Officers And Employees — Jurisdiction, Powers, And Temporary Assignment

See more information ...

Smart Summary

Please sign up to generate summary.

MICHAEL CAIN and JENNIFER CAIN, Indi v. duals, Plaintiffs,

ORDER

MARCO HERNANDEZ, District Judge

Magistrate Judge Dennis J. Hubel issued a Findings and Recommendation (doc. #162) on July 14, 2011, in which he recommends that I grant in part and deny in part the motions for summary judgment (doc. #120, #127, and #132) filed by Willamette Valley Medical Center, LLC ("Willamette Valley"), Wylie Steel Fabricators, Inc. ("Wylie Steel"), and Bovis Lend Lease, Inc. ("Bovis") (collectively, "Defendants"), respectively. In the Findings and Recommendation, the Magistrate Judge also recommends that I grant the motion for partial summary judgment (doc. #123) filed by Earl Swensson Associates, Inc. ("ESA").

Plaintiff Michael Cain and Jennifer Cain (collectively, the "Cains") and Defendants timely filed objections to the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation. The matter is now before me pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

When any party objects to any portion of the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the Magistrate Judge's report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Dawson v. Marshall, 561 F.3d 930, 932 (9th Cir. 2009); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003) (en banc).

I have carefully considered the parties' objections and conclude that the objections do not provide a basis to modify the Findings and Recommendation. I have also reviewed the pertinent portions of the record de novo and find no error in the Magistrate Judge's Findings and Recommendation.

CONCLUSION

The Court ADOPTS Magistrate Judge Hubel's Findings and Recommendation (doc. #162). Defendants' motions for summary judgment (doc. #120, #127, and #132) are therefore granted in part and denied in part, and ESA's motion for partial summary judgment (doc. #123) is granted. Oral argument is unnecessary.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

DATED this 12^th day of September, 2011.

MICHAEL CAIN and JENNIFER CAIN, Indi v. duals, Plaintiffs,

Comments