Waldrup v. Mueller et al, No. 9:2018cv00354 - Document 55 (D.S.C. 2019)

Court Description: OPINION & ORDER adopting 52 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant and denying 43 Motion to Dismiss or in the Alternative Motion for Summary Judgment. Signed by Honorable Henry M Herlong, Jr on 03/19/2019. (egra, )

Download PDF
Waldrup v. Mueller et al Doc. 55 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA BEAUFORT DIVISION Richard Douglas Waldrup, #20170291, Plaintiff, vs. Sheriff Steve Mueller and Captain Robert Padgett, Defendants. ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) C.A. No. 9:18-0354-HMH-BM OPINION & ORDER This matter is before the court for review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) 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 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. § 636(b)(1) (2006). The parties filed no objections to the Report and Recommendation. In the absence of objections to the magistrate judge’s Report and Recommendation, this court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). The court must “only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face 1 Dockets.Justia.com of the record in order to accept the recommendation.” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005). After a thorough review of the Report and Recommendation and the record in this case, the court adopts Magistrate Judge Marchant’s Report and Recommendation and incorporates it herein. It is therefore ORDERED that Defendants’ motion for summary judgment, docket number 43, is denied. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/Henry M. Herlong, Jr. Senior United States District Judge Greenville, South Carolina March 19, 2019 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.