Hoskins et al v. Plaza Place Owners Association, Inc. et al

UNITED S TATES DISTRICT C OURT
S OUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS
HOUSTON DIVISION
HLEVICTOR A. HOSKINS ,
J R., and T RACEY R.
YOUNG,
Plaintiffs,
vs
P LAZA P LACE O WNERS
ASSOCIATION, I NC, and
ASSOCIA P RINCIPAL
MANAGEMENT G ROUP OF
HOUSTON,
Defendants.
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
§
CIVIL ACTION N O
4:25-cv-01107
J UDGE CHARLES ESKRIDGE
ORDER A DOPTING
MEMORANDUM AND RECOMMENDATION
Plaintiffs Hlevictor A. Hoskins, Jr., and Tracey R.
Young proceed here pro se. They sue Defendants Plaza
Place 	Owners 	Association, 	Inc, 	and 	Associa 	Principal
Management 	Group 	of 	Houston 	for 	violations 	of 	the
Americans with Disabilities Act and the Fair Housing Act.
Dkt 1 at ¶¶47–65. They also bring claims for breach of
fiduciary duty and negligence. Id at ¶¶66–81.
The matter was referred for disposition to Magistrate
Judge Yvonne Ho. Dkt 9. Plaintiffs brought motions for an
emergency temporary restraining order and to “decline
consent to Magistrate Judge.” Dkts 11 & 12. Judge Ho
issued a Memorandum and Recommendation in which she
recommended that the motions be denied. Dkt 14.
The district court reviews de novo those conclusions of
a 	magistrate 	judge 	to 	which 	a 	party 	has 	specifically
United States District Court
Southern District of Texas
ENTERED
November 21, 2025
Nathan Ochsner, Clerk
Case 4:25-cv-01107 Document 37 Filed 11/21/25 in TXSD Page 1 of 3

2
objected. See FRCP 72(b)(3) & 28 USC § 636(b)(1)(C); see
also United States v Wilson, 864 F2d 1219, 1221 (5th Cir
1989, per curiam). The district court may accept any other
portions to which there’s no objection if satisfied that no
clear error appears on the face of the record. See Guillory v
PPG Industries Inc, 434 F3d 303, 308 (5th Cir 2005), citing
Douglass v United Services Automobile Association, 79 F3d
1415, 1430 (5th Cir 1996, en banc); see also FRCP 72(b)
advisory committee note (1983).
Plaintiffs 	filed 	objections 	as 	to 	the 	motion 	for
temporary restraining order. Dkt 15. They assert that the
Memorandum and Recommendation errs 	by indicating
that they must serve or confer with Defendants prior to
requesting the temporary restraining order. They further
contend 	that 	the 	Memorandum 	and 	Recommendation
erred in finding that Plaintiffs failed to show substantial
likelihood of success on the merits and irreparable harm.
Id at 2–4.
Upon de novo review and determination, the objections
lack merit. The Memorandum and Recommendation didn’t
require that Plaintiffs serve the temporary restraining
order on Defendants or confer with Defendants. Rather,
Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 65(b)(1) itself requires
Plaintiffs to certify the reasons why notice shouldn’t be
required prior to issuance of a temporary restraining order
ex parte. Plaintiffs didn’t provide such reasons. Plaintiffs
also 	bear 	the 	burden 	of 	demonstrating 	a 	substantial
likelihood of success on the merits. The unsubstantiated
allegations 	contained 	in 	the 	motion 	fail 	to 	meet 	this
standard. 	And 	Plaintiffs 	fail 	to 	demonstrate 	any
irreparable harm beyond the speculative consequences
from their failure to pay disputed charges.
No clear error otherwise appears upon review and
consideration of the Memorandum and Recommendation,
the record, and the applicable law.
The objections by Plaintiffs Hlevictor A. Hoskins, Jr.,
and 	Tracey 	R. 	Young 	to 	the 	Memorandum 	and
Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge are OVERRULED.
Dkt 15.
Case 4:25-cv-01107 Document 37 Filed 11/21/25 in TXSD Page 2 of 3

3
The 	Memorandum 	and 	Recommendation 	of 	the
Magistrate Judge is ADOPTED as the Memorandum and
Order of this Court. Dkt 14.
The 	emergency 	motion 	by 	Plaintiffs 	Hlevictor 	A.
Hoskins, 	Jr., 	and 	Tracey 	R. 	Young 	for 	temporary
restraining order and preliminary injunction is DENIED.
Dkt 11.
The motion by Plaintiffs Hlevictor A. Hoskins and
Tracey R. Young to decline consent to the magistrate judge
is DENIED. Dkt 12.
SO ORDERED.
Signed on November 18, 2025, at Houston, Texas.
___________________________
Hon. Charles Eskridge
United States District Judge
Case 4:25-cv-01107 Document 37 Filed 11/21/25 in TXSD Page 3 of 3