Perkins-Brown et al v. Tri County Electric Cooperative, No. 3:2006cv03512 - Document 52 (D.S.C. 2008)
Court Description: OPINION AND ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS for 51 Report and Recommendations, 41 Motion for Summary Judgment filed by Tri County Electric Cooperative. Signed by Honorable Cameron McGowan Currie on 10/21/2008. (cbru, )
Download PDF
<![CDATA[
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION HERMENIA PERKINS-BROWN, VONETTA HARRIS, ) ) ) Plaintiffs, ) ) ) ) TRI COUNTY ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, ) ) Defendant. ) __________________________________________) C.A. No. 3:06-3512-CMC-JRM OPINION AND ORDER ON MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT This matter is before the court for review of the Report and Recommendation ( Report ) entered on October 1, 2008. For the reasons set forth below, the Report is adopted and Defendant s motion for summary judgment is granted in full. STANDARD 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 this court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation 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. See 28 U.S.C. ยง 636(b)(1). The court reviews only for clear error in the absence of an objection. 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. ) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee s note). DISCUSSION Through this action, Plaintiffs seek recovery under Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964 for alleged racial discrimination. Specifically, they allege that they were paid less than Caucasian employees and that they were subjected to a racially hostile work environment. The Report summarizes the relevant evidence, explaining why it is inadequate to support either aspect of Plaintiffs discrimination claim. No objection has been filed despite passage of the time allowed for such objection. This court has, therefore, reviewed the Report for clear error. Having found no such error, this court adopts the Report in full. CONCLUSION For the reasons set forth above, the Report and Recommendation is adopted and Defendant s motion for summary judgment is granted in full. The Clerk of Court is directed to enter judgment in Defendant s favor. IT IS SO ORDERED. S/ Cameron McGowan Currie CAMERON MCGOWAN CURRIE UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE Columbia, South Carolina October 21, 2008 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.
