Whittington v. Variety Wholesalers Inc, No. 0:2011cv01501 - Document 31 (D.S.C. 2012)

Court Description: OPINION and ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS adopting 28 Report and Recommendations, granting 23 Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Honorable Cameron McGowan Currie on 4/26/2012. (cbru, )

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION Rebecca Whittington, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) ) Variety Wholesalers, Inc. ) ) Defendant. ) ___________________________________ ) C/A NO. 0:11-1501-CMC-SVH OPINION and ORDER Through this action, Plaintiff Rebecca Whittington ( Plaintiff ) seeks recovery under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. § 2000(e) et seq. ( Title VII ), from her former employer, Defendant Variety Wholesalers, Inc. ( Defendant ). Plaintiff asserts a claim for wrongful discharge based on pregnancy. She also includes allegations of sexual harassment and retaliation in her amended complaint. BACKGROUND The matter is currently before the court for review of the Report and Recommendation ( Report ) of Magistrate Judge Shiva V. Hodges, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 (b) and Local Rule 73.02(B)(2)(g) , D.S.C., and which was filed on April 3, 2012. Dkt. No. 28. The Report recommends that the court grant Defendant s motion for summary judgment. Id. The parties were advised of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report and the serious consequences if they failed to do so. Id. Neither party has filed objections to the Report, which were due on April 20, 2012. STANDARD The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination remains with the court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of any portion of the Magistrate Judge s Report and Recommendation to which a specific objection is made. The court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation made by the Magistrate Judge or recommit the matter to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). In the absence of an objection, the court reviews the Report and Recommendation only for clear error. See Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (stating that in the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct a de novo review, but instead must only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record in order to accept the recommendation ) (citation omitted). CONCLUSION The court has reviewed the parties briefs, the applicable law, and the findings and recommendations of the Magistrate Judge for clear error. Finding none, the court adopts and incorporates the Report by reference. For the reasons set forth therein, the court grants Defendant s motion for summary judgment and dismisses Plaintiff s claim with prejudice. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Cameron McGowan Currie CAMERON MCGOWAN CURRIE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Columbia, South Carolina April 26, 2012 2

Some case metadata and case summaries were written with the help of AI, which can produce inaccuracies. You should read the full case before relying on it for legal research purposes.

This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.