Legal Opinion
Cantley v. DSMF, INC.
District Court, D. Oregon
Decided March 20, 2006No. CIV. 05-1766-STPublishedCited by 2 opinions
1Opinion of the Court
ORDER
KING, District Judge.
The Honorable Janice Stewart, United States Magistrate Judge, filed Findings and Recommendation on February 2, 2006. Defendant filed timely objections to the Findings and Recommendation. When either party objects to any portion of a magistrate’s Findings and Recommendation, the district court must make a de novo determination of that portion of the magistrate’s report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); McDonnell Douglas Corp. v. Commodore Business Machines, Inc., 656 F.2d 1309, 1313 (9th Cir.1981), cert. denied, 455 U.S. 920, 102 S.Ct. 1277, 71 L.Ed.2d 461 (1982). The matter is…
2Cases cited15 opinions
- McDonnell Douglas Corporation v. Commodore Business MacHines Inc. And Commodore Business MacHines (Canada) LimitedCourt of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit · 1981
- McGanty v. StaudenrausOregon Supreme Court · 1995
- Holien v. Sears, Roebuck and Co.Oregon Supreme Court · 1984
- Sheets v. KnightOregon Supreme Court · 1989
- Brown v. Transcon LinesOregon Supreme Court · 1978
10 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.
3Cited by2 opinions
- Deatherage v. JohnsonCourt of Appeals of Oregon · 2009
- Titus v. City of Prairie CityDistrict Court, D. Oregon · 2011