District Court, E.D. North Carolina, 2024

Peterman v. RAMod Brewers, LLC

Peterman v. RAMod Brewers, LLC
District Court, E.D. North Carolina · Decided January 5, 2024
Peterman v. RAMod Brewers, LLC

Trial Court Opinion

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA EASTERN DIVISION Case No. 4:21-cv-00156-M HAMPTON PETERMAN, Plaintiff, DEFAULT JUDGMENT RAMOD BREWERS, LLC; AARON AVERY; and.

MATTHEW ROUSE, Defendants.

This matter comes before the court on the Memorandum and Recommendation (““M&R”) issued by United States Magistrate Judge Robert T. Numbers, II [DE 48]. Judge Numbers recommends that this court grant Plaintiff's Motion for Default Judgment [DE 42]. To date, no objections have been filed.

The court “may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the . . . recommendation[] .. . receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); accord Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 271 (1976). The court “shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” Jd. § 636(b)(1). Without timely objection, de novo review is unnecessary, and a district court need only check for clear error on the face of the record to accept the magistrate judge’s recommendation. Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (citing 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)). Upon careful review of the record, “the 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).

Upon careful review of the M&R and the record presented, and finding no clear error, the court ADOPTS the findings and conclusions of the magistrate judge as its own. For the reasons stated in the M&R, the motion [DE 42] is GRANTED.

It is ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that: Default judgment is entered against Defendants on each of Plaintiff's claims; 2: Plaintiff is awarded damages in the amount of $162,479.25, plus post-judgment interest; and a Plaintiff is awarded his reasonable attorneys’ fees and costs in the amount of $51,813.00.

SO ORDERED this ae. day of January, 2023. padoh Wide RICHARD E. MYERS II CHIEF UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.