Hernandez v. State Farm Fire and Casualty Company

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLORADO Judge Christine M. Arguello

Civil Action No. 20-cv-00986-CMA-NRN VICTOR HERNANDEZ, Plaintiff, v. STATE FARM FIRE AND CASUALTY COMPANY, Defendant.

ORDER

This matter is before the Court on Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint (Doc. # 19) and Magistrate Judge Neureiter’s Recommendation (Doc. #35) that Plaintiff’s Motion for Leave to Amend be denied. For the following reasons, the Court affirms and adopts Judge Neureiter’s Recommendation.

This is an insurance bad faith case. Plaintiff alleges that Defendant unreasonably delayed or denied payment of insurance benefits following a fire at Plaintiff’s restaurant. (Doc. # 7). After the deadline to amend pleadings had passed, Plaintiff sought leave to amend his Complaint to add a claim for intentional infliction of emotional distress. (Doc. # 18 (Scheduling Order); Doc. # 19 (Motion for Leave to Amend)). Defendant opposed the Motion. (Doc. # 28). Judge Neureiter held a hearing on the Motion, at which he heard arguments for both sides. (Doc. # 31). After the hearing, Judge Neureiter issued a written Recommendation concluding that Plaintiff’s amendment would be futile and that Plaintiff's Motion should therefore be denied. (Doc. # 35). Neither party objected to the Recommendation.

Under 28 U.S.C. § 636(a)(1)(B), this Court may designate a magistrate judge to consider dispositive motions and submit recommendations to the Court. When a magistrate judge submits a recommendation, the Court must “determine de novo any part of the magistrate judge’s [recommended] disposition that has been properly objected to.” F.R.C.P. 72(b)(3). In the absence of a timely objection, however, “the district court may review a magistrate [judge’s] report under any standard it deems appropriate.” Summers v. Utah, 927 F.2d 1165, 1167 (10th Cir. 1991). Applying this standard, the Court concludes that Judge Neureiter’s Recommendation is well- reasoned, and the Court finds no clear error in Judge Neureiter’s Recommendation.

Therefore, the Court AFFIRMS Judge Neureiter’s Recommendation (Doc. # 35) and ADOPTS the Recommendation as an order of this Court. Plaintiff's Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint (Doc. # 19) is hereby DENIED.

DATED: April 7, 2021 BY THE COURT: — Wie rn CHRISTINE M. ARGUELLO United States District Judge