From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Davis v. NFN Funerburk

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Greenwood Division
Apr 23, 2008
C/A NO. 8:08-1105-CMC-BHH (D.S.C. Apr. 23, 2008)

Opinion

C/A NO. 8:08-1105-CMC-BHH.

April 23, 2008


ORDER


This matter is before the court on Plaintiff's pro se complaint, filed in this court pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983.

In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2)(d), DSC, this matter was referred to United States Magistrate Judge Bruce Howe Hendricks for pre-trial proceedings and a Report and Recommendation ("Report"). On April 9, 2008, the Magistrate Judge issued a Report recommending that this complaint be dismissed without prejudice and without issuance and service of process. The Magistrate Judge advised Plaintiff of the procedures and requirements for filing objections to the Report and the serious consequences if he failed to do so. Plaintiff has filed no objections; however, on April 18, Plaintiff filed a letter with the court indicating that he wished to dismiss this case.

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 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 reviews the Report 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.") (citation omitted).

After reviewing the record of this matter, the applicable law, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, and Plaintiff's motion, the court grants Plaintiff's motion to dismiss this action. This matter is dismissed without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Davis v. NFN Funerburk

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Greenwood Division
Apr 23, 2008
C/A NO. 8:08-1105-CMC-BHH (D.S.C. Apr. 23, 2008)
Case details for

Davis v. NFN Funerburk

Case Details

Full title:Donnie A. Davis, Jr., #235971, Plaintiff, v. NFN Funerburk, Doctor-Dentist…

Court:United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Greenwood Division

Date published: Apr 23, 2008

Citations

C/A NO. 8:08-1105-CMC-BHH (D.S.C. Apr. 23, 2008)

Citing Cases

White v. Stirling

Accordingly, Plaintiff's allegations are insufficient to support an actionable § 1983 claim against…