Christina A. Bryan

“Pending is a Memorandum and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Christina A. Bryan, recommending that the motion by Defendant be granted. Dkt 17. ... The motion by Defendant to compel arbitration and dismiss the case is GRANTED. Dkt 8. This case is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE in favor of arbitral proceedings.”

“She recommends that the motion for summary judgment be granted because Nesbitt has failed to raise a triable issue of fact demonstrating any current right, title, or ownership in the property after the foreclosure sale. ... The motion by Defendants Wells Fargo and Select Portfolio Servicing for summary judgment is GRANTED. Dkt 23. Summary judgment is also sua sponte granted in favor of Defendant Jelinis LLC.”

“For the reasons discussed above, the Court RECOMMENDS that Defendants' Rule 12(c) Motion for Dismissal be GRANTED, and Plaintiff's claims be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE.”

“the Court recommends that Plaintiff's request for injunctive relief and for writ of possession be denied ... In sum, Plaintiff's Petition and Motion for a TRO should be DENIED.”

Bryan's M&R recommended remand for lack of subject-matter jurisdiction (no party motion to remand: a sua sponte jurisdictional remand of a pro se removal) plus a $500 sanction because the defendants had improperly removed the same case a second time. District Judge Charles Eskridge adopted it, overruling the defendants' objections on de novo review. This is a non-motion disposition. It shows strict enforcement of removal jurisdiction and willingness to sanction repeat improper removers.

Bryan's M&R recommended dismissing a pro se bankruptcy appeal (from an order granting relief from the automatic stay) for want of prosecution (appellant never paid the filing fee or took steps to proceed). District Judge Charles Eskridge adopted it (no objections). This is a non-motion disposition.

“the Court RECOMMENDS that Defendant's Motion to Dismiss (ECF 165) be DENIED ... Lamell's Motion to Dismiss Plaintiffs' Claims be DENIED in its entirety [M&R signed Christina A. Bryan, 2024-05-15]”

“Plaintiffs' Motion to Strike (ECF 166) be DENIED as moot”

“Having reviewed the Complaint, the Court RECOMMENDS that this case be dismissed with prejudice because it is frivolous and fails to state a claim for relief. ... the Court recommends that this case be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and Plaintiff's Motion for Protective Order (ECF 8) be DENIED.”

“Pending is a Memorandum and Recommendation by Magistrate Judge Christina A. Bryan, recommending that two pending motions by Plaintiffs be granted, being (i) unopposed motion for final approval of class settlement and entry of final order and judgment, and (ii) motion for attorney fees, litigation expenses, and service award.”

“On March 2, 2026, Magistrate Judge Christina A. Bryan recommended that Plaintifrs moti9n for summary judgment be denied, Defendant's cross motion for summary judgment be granted, and that the Commissioner's decision be affirmed (Document No. 21).”

“Judge Bryan filed a Memorandum and Recommendation on April 2, 2026, recommending that Plaintiff’s Unopposed Motion for Attorney’s Fees (Dkt. 16) be granted in part.”

“the Court RECOMMENDS that Defendant’s Motion to Dismiss (ECF 20) be GRANTED and Plaintiff’s federal claims be DISMISSED WITH PREJUDICE and his state law claimed be DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE due to lack of jurisdiction.”

“the Court recommends the EEOC’s Motion to Dismiss (14) be GRANTED and Plaintiff’s claims against the EEOC be dismissed without prejudice for lack of subject matter jurisdiction.”