From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Goldstein v. Bank of America, N.A.

United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Charlotte Division
Mar 24, 2010
1:09cv329 (W.D.N.C. Mar. 24, 2010)

Opinion

1:09cv329.

March 24, 2010


ORDER


THIS MATTER is before the court upon the Memorandum and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Dennis L. Howell, filed January 19, 2010. The parties were advised that pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C) and Rule 72 of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, written objections to the Memorandum and Recommendation must be filed within 14 days after service of the same. Plaintiffs filed their objection on February 23, 2010, well outside the fourteen day deadline. Accordingly, Plaintiffs have waived their right to a de novo review.

After an independent and thorough review of the magistrate's memorandum, the court concludes that there is no clear error on the face of the record and that the recommendation to grant Defendant's Motion to Dismiss is correct and in accordance with law. Accordingly, the findings and conclusions of the magistrate are affirmed.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that the Memorandum and Recommendation of the magistrate is hereby AFFIRMED.


Summaries of

Goldstein v. Bank of America, N.A.

United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Charlotte Division
Mar 24, 2010
1:09cv329 (W.D.N.C. Mar. 24, 2010)
Case details for

Goldstein v. Bank of America, N.A.

Case Details

Full title:FREDA GOLDSTEIN and ISREAL GOLDSTEIN, et al., Plaintiffs, v. BANK OF…

Court:United States District Court, W.D. North Carolina, Charlotte Division

Date published: Mar 24, 2010

Citations

1:09cv329 (W.D.N.C. Mar. 24, 2010)

Citing Cases

Foster v. Amarnek

The Court finds the allegations insufficient as a matter of law to establish RICO claims under 18 U.S.C. §…