Vandiver v. Martin

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• explaining that an objection that “simply summarizes what has been presented before” is ineffective
• observing that “[a]n objection that does nothing more than state a disagreement with a [magistrate judge’s] suggested resolution, or simply summarizes what has been presented before, is not an objection” under 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)
• “An ‘objection’ that ... simply summarizes what has been presented before, is not an ‘objection’ as that term is used in this context.”
• “An ‘objection’ that . . . simply summarizes what has been presented before, is not an ‘objection’ as that term is used in this context.”
• “An ‘objection’ that . . . simply summarizes what has been presented before, is not an ‘objection’ as that term is used in this context.”
• “an objection . . . that merely restates the arguments previously presented . . . is not sufficient[.]

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).