Domnique A. Smith v. First Merchants Bank, et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Northern District of Indiana adopts the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation and grants all defendants’ motions to dismiss. The court dismisses the action with prejudice, concluding that the plaintiff’s claims were inadequately pleaded, contradicted by exhibits, or otherwise futile to amend. The order is based on de novo review of the plaintiff’s objections and clear-error review of the unobjected portions of the recommendation.

Holdings

1. A district court must conduct de novo review of those portions of a magistrate judge's disposition to which specific written objections are made and reviews unobjected portions for clear error.
2. Dismissal with prejudice was appropriate because plaintiff had already filed multiple defective pleadings and further amendment would be futile.
3. The court adopted the Report and Recommendation, granted each of defendants' three motions to dismiss, and dismissed the action with prejudice.

Questions Presented

1. What standard of review governs a district court's consideration of objections to a magistrate judge's report and recommendation on dispositive motions?
2. Whether the magistrate judge improperly analyzed or dismissed plaintiff's statutory claims and drew factual inferences from exhibits.
3. Whether the action should be dismissed with prejudice without granting plaintiff another opportunity to amend under Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 15(a)(2).

Disposition

dismissed