Mary Eitel v. PNC Bank, N.A., et al.

Summary

The United States District Court for the Western District of Kentucky reviews Plaintiff Mary Eitel’s objections to a magistrate judge’s nondispositive order concerning reconstruction of the record for unrecorded telephonic status conferences. The court grants Plaintiff leave to file a reply and corrected reply but denies and overrules her objections, concluding that the magistrate judge’s order was neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law.

Holdings

1. The magistrate judge's refusal to certify paragraph 9 of Plaintiff's counsel's affidavit was neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law.
2. When settling and approving a record under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 10(c), a magistrate judge may consider the existing record, party submissions and objections, counsel representations made under Rule 11, and the judge's own recollection of events.
3. Plaintiff's request for supplemental briefing and courtesy copies of unpublished cases was properly denied because the request lacked support and the cited cases were electronically available under the applicable local rule.

Questions Presented

1. Whether the magistrate judge's refusal to certify disputed portions of Plaintiff's counsel's affidavit for reconstruction of the record was clearly erroneous or contrary to law.
2. Whether the magistrate judge properly considered the existing record, counsel's representations, and her own recollection under Federal Rule of Appellate Procedure 10(c).
3. Whether the magistrate judge improperly relied on unpublished decisions or failed to provide a complete record of the unrecorded proceedings.
4. Whether Plaintiff should receive supplemental briefing and courtesy copies of unpublished cases cited by SouthState.

Disposition

other