From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Kirschbaum v. Rise Law Grp.

United States District Court, District of Oregon
Jul 19, 2023
Civ. 1:22-cv-1394-CL (D. Or. Jul. 19, 2023)

Opinion

Civ. 1:22-cv-1394-CL

07-19-2023

ANGELEEN KIRSCHBAUM, Plaintiff, v. RISE LAW GROUP, INC., a domestic business corporation, MARY ANNE PITCHER, an individual, and JAMIE HAZLETT, an individual, Defendants.


ORDER

MICHAEL MCSHANE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Magistrate Judge Mark Clarke filed a Findings and Recommendation (#33), and the matter is now before this court. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B), Fed.R.Civ.P. 72. Although neither party filed objections, I reviewed the legal principles de novo. United States v. Bernhardt, 840 F.2d 1441, 1445 (9th Cir. 1998). I find no error and conclude the report is correct. Magistrate Judge Clarke's Findings and Recommendation (#33) is adopted. Defendants' Motion for partial summary judgment (#19) is DENIED. Pursuant to the stipulated dismissal (#35), Defendants' counterclaim for breach of contract is DISMISSED, with prejudice and without fees or costs.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Kirschbaum v. Rise Law Grp.

United States District Court, District of Oregon
Jul 19, 2023
Civ. 1:22-cv-1394-CL (D. Or. Jul. 19, 2023)
Case details for

Kirschbaum v. Rise Law Grp.

Case Details

Full title:ANGELEEN KIRSCHBAUM, Plaintiff, v. RISE LAW GROUP, INC., a domestic…

Court:United States District Court, District of Oregon

Date published: Jul 19, 2023

Citations

Civ. 1:22-cv-1394-CL (D. Or. Jul. 19, 2023)