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.

Jacob v. Greenwood Credit Union

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF NEW YORK


February 9, 2011

JACOB TEREBELO, PLAINTIFF,
v.
GREENWOOD CREDIT UNION, DEFENDANT

The opinion of the court was delivered by: Spatt, District Judge.

MEMORANDUM OF DECISION AND ORDER

On May 14, 2007, plaintiff Jacob Terebelo (the "Plaintiff") commenced this action individually and on behalf of a class against defendant Greenwood Credit Union alleging violations of the Fair Credit Reporting Act, 15 U.S.C. § 1681 et seq. and the New York Fair Credit Reporting Act, N.Y. Gen. Bus. §380-m et seq. On October 24, 2007 this matter was transferred by the United States Judicial Panel on Multidistrict Litigation to the District of Massachusetts for consolidated pretrial proceedings. On August 27, 2008 the case was remanded back to this Court and on October 5, 2010 United States Magistrate Judge William D. Wall issued a status report request to the Plaintiff.

In response to Judge Wall's status request, the Plaintiff informed the court in a letter dated October 18, 2010 (the "October 18th letter") that the Massachusetts case had been dismissed, that the order of dismissal had been affirmed on appeal, and that presumably the court should have entered a dismissal of the matter upon remand. On October 20, 2010, based upon the Plaintiff's representations in the October 18th letter, Judge Wall issued a Report and Recommendation (the "Report") recommending that the Court dismiss the case. To date, there have been no objections filed to Judge Wall's Report.

In reviewing a report and recommendation, a court "may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. §636(b)(1)(C). "To accept the report and recommendation of a magistrate, to which no timely objection has been made, a district court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record." Wilds v. United Parcel Serv., 262 F. Supp. 2d 163, 169 (S.D.N.Y. 2003) (citing Nelson v. Smith, 618 F. Supp. 1186, 1189 (S.D.N.Y. 1985)). The Court has reviewed Judge Wall's Report and finds it to be without any legal or factual errors.

There being no objection to Judge Wall's Report, it is hereby ORDERED, that Judge Wall's Report and Recommendation is adopted in its entirety, and it is further ORDERED, that the case is dismissed, and it is further ORDERED, that the Clerk of the Court is directed to close this case.

SO ORDERED.

Dated: Central Islip, New York

ARTHUR D. SPATT United States District Judge

20110209

© 1992-2011 VersusLaw Inc.



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.