Buy This Entire Record For
Coffey v. Coffey
United States District Court, W.D. Tennessee, Western Division Division
February 18, 2015
LESLIE D. COFFEY, Plaintiff,
PAULA SUE COFFEY, Individually; ELIZABETH HILL, Individually; KATHLEEN OVERTON, Individually; RICK RUSHWORTH, Individually; ANGELA MORGAN FORBES, Individually; ANNA JONES LEDFORD, Individually; TOBY LEDFORD, Individually; PATRICK, BEARD, SCHULMAN, AND JOCOWAY, PLLC; HAMILTON COUNTY TENNESSEE SCHOOL SYSTEMS; HAMILTON COUNTY SHERIFF JIM HAMMOND; HAMILTON COUNTY TENNESSEE; CITY OF LOOKOUT MOUNTAIN, TENNESSEE; RANDY BOWDEN, in his Official Capacity as Chief of Police of Lookout Mountain, Tennessee; CITY OF CHATTANOOGA TENNESSEE POLICE DEPARTMENT; and WILLIAM E. (BILL) YOUNG, ADMINISTRATOR OF COURTS FOR THE STATE OF TENNESSEE, Defendants.
ORDER ADOPTING MAGISTRATE JUDGE'S REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION DISMISSING CASE
SHERYL H. LIPMAN, District Judge.
Before the Court is the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation ("Report"), filed January 28, 2015. (ECF No. 55.) In the Report, the Magistrate Judge recommended that the pro se Plaintiff's Complaint (ECF No. 1) should be dismissed without prejudice for improper venue, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1391.6>
Pursuant to the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, "[w]ithin 14 days after being served with a copy of the recommended disposition, a party may serve and file specific written objections to the proposed findings and recommendations." Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b)(2). No objections to the Report have been filed, and the time for filing objections has expired. See Fed.R.Civ.P. 5(b)(2), 6(d), 72(b)(2).
"When no timely objection is filed, the court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation." Fed.R.Civ.P. 72(b) advisory committee notes. On clear-error review of the Magistrate Judge's Report and Recommendation, the Court hereby ADOPTS the Report and Recommendation (ECF No. 55) in its entirety.
Accordingly, Plaintiff's Pro Se Complaint (ECF No. 1) is ...