Hurlbert v. South Carolina, State of
Filing
16
ORDER RULING ON 10 REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS and REFERRING CASE to Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant for further consideration consistent with this order. Signed by Honorable Patrick Michael Duffy on 3/5/09. Motions referred to Bristow Marchant. (rpol, )
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Donald James Hurlbert, Plaintiff, vs. State of South Carolina, Defendant.
) C.A. #2:09-0241-PMD ) ) ) ) ORDER ) ) ) ) )
This matter is before the court upon the magistrate judge's recommendation that the above named matter be dismissed. Because plaintiff is proceeding pro se, this matter was referred to the magistrate judge.1 A review of the record indicates that the magistrate judge's report recommends that plaintiff's case be dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. On February 23, 2009, plaintiff filed objections to the report and recommendation, as well as a motion to amend complaint. This being the case, the court declines to conduct a de novo review of the report and recommendation at this time and refers the case back to the magistrate judge for further review and consideration based upon plaintiff's motion to amend. Now therefore, IT IS ORDERED that the within matter is herewith referred back to Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant for further consideration consistent with this order.
Pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 United States Code, § 636(b)(1)(B), and Local Rule 73.02(B)(2)(e), D.S.C., the magistrate judge is authorized to review all pretrial matters in such pro se cases, and submit findings and recommendations to this Court.
1
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.
March 5, 2009 Charleston, South Carolina
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?
