4:26-cv-00066•Richard-Flenory v. CarMax Auto Superstores, Inc. - Hulen Mall Store et al
Richard-Flenory v. CarMax Auto Superstores, Inc. - Hulen Mall Store et al
4:26-cv-00066TxndMar 24, 2026
Full text
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH DIVISION BEYLA Z RICHARD -F LENORY , Plaintiff, v. No. 4:26-cv-00066-P CARMAX A UTO SUPERSTORES, INC. - H ULEN M ALL STORE, ET AL ., Defendants. ORDER On January 21, 2026, Plaintiff filed a Motion to Remand to State Court. ECF No. 6. The United States Magistrate Judge made Findings, Conclusions, and a Recommendation regarding the Motion. ECF No. 22. No objections were filed, and the Magistrate Judge’s Recommendation is ripe for review. The District Judge reviewed the proposed Findings, Conclusions, and Recommendation for plain error. Finding none, the undersigned District Judge believes that the Findings and Conclusions of the Magistrate Judge are correct, and they are accepted as the Findings and Conclusions of the Court. The Court therefore ORDERS that the Motion to Remand (ECF No. 6) is DENIED. SO ORDERED on this 24th day of March 2026. UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE NORTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS FORT WORTH DIVISION REGINALEA KEMP , Plaintiff, v. No. 4:23-cv-00841-P REGIONS BANK ET AL ., Defendants. ORDER Before the Court is Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Leave to File Second Amended Complaint. ECF No. 18. Having considered the Motion and applicable docket entries, the Court GRANTS the Motion. SO ORDERED on this 18th day of September 2023. ______________________________________________ Mark T. Pittman UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Case 4:26-cv-00066-P-BJ Document 30 Filed 03/24/26 Page 1 of 1 PageID <pageID>
Wondering how this text applies to your situation?
Free consultation, no commitment
Describe your situation. Our team will contact you by email about your consultation.
Continue your research in ChatGPT or Claude
Connect Omnilex to search the legal corpus from your AI assistant.