Summary
stating that if a trustee is a beneficial owner of the claim being asserted by a trust, he is a "real party in interest" and can proceed pro se with the trust's claims
Summary of this case from Tenpenny v. U.S.Opinion
CIV. No. 98-0340-E-BLW
February 12, 2001
ORDER
The Court has before it a Report and Recommendation filed by the Chief United States Magistrate Judge. Defendants Detsel J. Parkinson and Earlene Parkinson filed objections to the Report and Recommendation. The Court has examined the Report and Recommendation, in light of the objections, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and finds that the Report and Recommendation accurately sets forth the facts and correctly applies the governing legal standards. Accordingly,
NOW THEREFORE IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, that the Report and Recommendation (Docket No. 85) shall be, and the same is hereby, ADOPTED as the decision of the District Court and incorporated fully herein by reference.
IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that (1) the defendants' motion for sanctions (docket no. 61) is DENIED; (2) plaintiff's renewed motion for default judgment against Diversified Investments and Revenue Trust (docket no. 63) is GRANTED; (3) plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings or in the alternative for summary judgment against Diversified Investments and Revenue Trust (docket no. 65) is DENIED; (4) plaintiff's motion for judgment on the pleadings (docket no. 65 part 1) is DENIED; (5) plaintiff's alternative motion for summary judgment against defendants Detsel and Earlene Parkinson (docket no. 65 part 2) is GRANTED; (6) defendants' motion to dismiss (docket no. 71) is DENIED; (7) Defendants' motion to strike (docket no. 78) is DENIED; (8) defendants' motion to strike or quash and to dismiss (docket no. 80) is DENIED,