Jewett et al v. Scottsdale Insurance Company et al, No. 3:2018cv00770 - Document 23 (D. Or. 2018)

Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER. Upon review, I agree with Judge You's recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R 21 in full. Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand 9 is GRANTED and this case is remanded to Multnomah County Circuit Court. Plaintiffs' req uest for reasonable attorney fees should be GRANTED, subject to this court's review of Plaintiffs' fee petition and any objections filed by Defendants. Plaintiffs are ordered to file a fee petition within two weeks of final ruling on this motion. Signed on 8/8/2018 by Judge Michael W. Mosman. (pvh)

Download PDF
Jewett et al v. Scottsdale Insurance Company et al Doc. 23 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF OREGON PORTLAND DIVISION SHARON M. JEWETT, in her capacity as trustee of Michael R. Jewett Revocable Living Trust; MICHAEL R. JEWETT, in his capacity as trustee of Michael R. Jewett Revocable Living Trust; MICHAEL R. JEWETT; and SHARON M. JEWETT, No. 3:18-cv-00770-YY OPINION AND ORDER Plaintiffs, v. SCOTTSDALE INSURANCE COMPANY and ALLIED INSURANCE COMPANY OF AMERICA, Defendants. MOSMAN,J., On July 16, 2018, Magistrate Judge Youlee Yim You issued her Findings and Recommendation (F&R) [21], recommending Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand [9] should be GRANTED and this case should be remanded to Multnomah County Circuit Court, and that Plaintiffs' request for reasonable attorney fees should be GRANTED, subject to this court's review of Plaintiffs' fee petition and any objections filed by Defendants. No objections were filed. DISCUSSION The magistrate judge makes only recommendations to the court, to which any party may file written objections. The court is not bound by the recommendations of the magistrate judge, 1 - OPINION AND ORDER Dockets.Justia.com but retains responsibility for making the final determination. The court is generally required to make a de novo determination regarding those portions of the report or specified findings or recommendation as to which an objection is made. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(C). However, the court is not required to review, de novo or under any other standard, the factual or legal conclusions of the magistrate judge as to those portions of the F&R to which no objections are addressed. See Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149 (1985); United States v. Reyna-Tapia, 328 F.3d 1114, 1121 (9th Cir. 2003). While the level of scrutiny under which I am required to review the F &R depends on whether or not objections have been filed, in either case, I am free to accept, reject, or modify any part of the F&R. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(l)(C). Upon review, I agree with Judge You's recommendation and I ADOPT the F&R [21] in full. Plaintiffs' Motion to Remand [9] is GRANTED and this case is remanded to Multnomah County Circuit Court. Plaintiffs' request for reasonable attorney fees should be GRANTED, subject to this court's review of Plaintiffs' fee petition and any objections filed by Defendants. Plaintiffs are ordered to file a fee petition within two weeks of final ruling on this motion. IT IS SO ORDERED. DATED this of August, 2018. Chief United States District Judge 2 - OPINION AND ORDER

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.