From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Childs v. Department of Corrections

United States District Court, D. South Carolina
Aug 17, 2005
C/A No. 0:05-1814-CMC-BM (D.S.C. Aug. 17, 2005)

Opinion

C/A No. 0:05-1814-CMC-BM.

August 17, 2005


OPINION AND ORDER


This is a pro se civil action filed by an inmate incarcerated at the Camille Griffin Graham Correctional Institution of the South Carolina Department of Corrections. Plaintiff alleges she was denied proper medical treatment for a spider bite. In accordance with the court's order of reference, 28 U.S.C. § 636(b), and Local Rule 73.02 (B)(2)(b) and (d), DSC, this matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Bristow Marchant for pre-trial proceedings and a Report and Recommendation. On June 30, 2005, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that the complaint be dismissed without prejudice and without service of process. The Magistrate Judge advised Plaintiff of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report and Recommendation and the serious consequences if she failed to do so. Plaintiff has filed no objections and the time for doing so has expired.

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 Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge 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).

The court has reviewed the record and the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge. The court agrees with the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge and hereby adopts the Report and Recommendation and incorporates it into this order. Accordingly, it is hereby

ORDERED that this action is dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Childs v. Department of Corrections

United States District Court, D. South Carolina
Aug 17, 2005
C/A No. 0:05-1814-CMC-BM (D.S.C. Aug. 17, 2005)
Case details for

Childs v. Department of Corrections

Case Details

Full title:Janice Childs, Plaintiff, v. Department of Corrections; Dr. Rafi; and…

Court:United States District Court, D. South Carolina

Date published: Aug 17, 2005

Citations

C/A No. 0:05-1814-CMC-BM (D.S.C. Aug. 17, 2005)