Searching over 5,500,000 cases.


searching
Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.

Lenins v. Dickson Operator, LLC

United States District Court, Middle District of Tennessee, Nashville Division

March 3, 2015

JOSEPH LENINS, Plaintiff,
v.
DICKSON OPERATOR, LLC d/b/a DICKSON HEALTH AND REHAB a/k/a DICKSON HEALTHCARE CENTER, WINDWARD HEALTH PARTNERS, LLC, MISSION HEALTH OF GEORGIA, LLC, UNIVERSAL HEALTHCARE ASSOCIATES, LLC, T AND C CAPITAL ASSETS, LLC and DIANE K. PATTERSON, Defendants.

HAYNES/KNOWLES, JUDGE

REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION

E. Clffton Knowles, United States Magistrate Judge

This matter is before the Court upon a “Joint Motion to Remand to the State Court” filed by Plaintiff Joseph Lenins and Defendants Dickson Operator, LLC d/b/a Dickson Health and Rehab a/k/a Dickson Healthcare Center, Windward Health Partners, LLC, and Mission Health of Georgia, LLC. Docket No. 8. Those parties agree that this action should be remanded to the Circuit Court for the 23rd Judicial District at Dickson County. As grounds for the instant Motion, Defendants state that they have not been able to obtain consent to the removal from Defendants T and C Capital Assets, LLC and Universal Healthcare Associates, LLC, who have been served in the State Court action.

For the foregoing reasons, the undersigned recommends that this action be remanded to the Circuit Court for the 23rd Judicial District at Dickson County.

Under Rule 72(b) of the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure, any party has fourteen (14) days after service of this Report and Recommendation in which to file any written objections to this Recommendation with the District Court. Any party opposing said objections shall have fourteen (14) days after service of any objections filed to this Report in which to file any response to said objections. Failure to file specific objections within fourteen (14) days of service of this Report and Recommendation can constitute a waiver of further appeal of this Recommendation. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 106 S.Ct. 466, 88 L.Ed.2d 435 (1985), reh 'g denied, 474 U.S. 1111 (1986); 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Fed. R Civ. P. 72.


Buy This Entire Record For $7.95

Official citation and/or docket number and footnotes (if any) for this case available with purchase.

Learn more about what you receive with purchase of this case.