UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO
September 26, 2012
JO ANN KURZ,
COLLEEN ZAHN, DEFENDANT.
The opinion of the court was delivered by: Edward J. Lodge United States District Judge
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDAT ION
On April 13, 2012, United States Magistrate Judge Mikel H. Williams issued a Report and Recommendation (Dkt. 14), recommending that Plaintiff's Application for In Forma Pauperis Status be denied. Judge Williams further recommended that plaintiff's complaint, conditionally filed, be dismissed. Any party may challenge a magistrate judge's proposed recommendation by filing written objections within fourteen days after being served with a copy of the Magistrate Judges's Report and Recommendation. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(C). The district court must then "make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made." Id. The district court may accept, reject, or modify in whole or in part, the findings and recommendations made by the Magistrate Judge. Id.; see also Fed. R. Civ. P. 72(b).
Plaintiff filed an objection challenging the Report and Recommendation's conclusions. (Dkt. Nos. 15-17). She also paid the $350 filing fee.
After considering Plaintiff's contentions and conducting a de novo review of the record, the Court agrees with Judge Williams' conclusions. The Court will not restate those conclusions here, but to summarize: (1) Plaintiff's negligence and malpractice claims are time-barred; and (2) her remaining claims are not viable under the reasoning of Weitz v. Green, 230 P.3d 743 (Idaho 2011) and Richardson v. Kessler, 255 P.2d 707, 709 (Idaho 1953). The Court will therefore dismiss her complaint with prejudice.
IT IS ORDERED:
1. Plaintiff's application for in forma pauperis status is MOOT, given her payment of the $350 filing fee.
2. Otherwise, the Court adopts the Report and Recommendation in its entirety. Plaintiff's complaint is therefore DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.
3. The Court will enter a separate judgment in accordance with Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 58.
© 1992-2012 VersusLaw Inc.