Allen v. Cartlidge et al
Filing
89
ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 78 Report and Recommendations that defendants' 26 Motion to Dismiss, filed by Ruth H Powell, Mr Cartlidge, Officer Hawkins, NFN Deckron, Sumner, Rushton, Director Ozmint, Doctor McCree, and 50 Motion to Dismiss, filed by Kyle Scates, M.D., should be Denied. Signed by Honorable Henry F Floyd on 3/23/09. (kmca)
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ANDERSON/GREENWOOD DIVISION DAVID WAYNE ALLEN, Plaintiff, vs. ASSOCIATE WARDEN MR. CARTRIDGE et al., Defendants. § § § § CIVIL ACTION NO. 8:08-600-HFF-BHH § § § §
ORDER This case was filed as a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. Plaintiff is proceeding pro se. The matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of the United States Magistrate Judge suggesting that Defendants' motions to dismiss [Doc. 26, 50] should be denied. The Report was made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Civil Rule 73.02 for the District of South Carolina. The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight. The responsibility to make a final determination remains with the Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report to which specific objection is made, and the Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge or recommit the matter with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
The Magistrate Judge filed the Report on February 3, 2009, but the parties failed to file any objections to the Report. In the absence of such objections, the Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). Moreover, a failure to object waives appellate review. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985). After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case pursuant to the standard set forth above, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the judgment of the Court that Defendants' motions to dismiss [Doc. 26, 50] should be DENIED. IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed this 23rd day of March, 2009, in Spartanburg, South Carolina.
s/ Henry F. Floyd HENRY F. FLOYD UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE ***** NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this Order within thirty (30) days from the date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
2
]]>
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?
