From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Drummond v. Jail

United States District Court, D. South Carolina
Feb 14, 2022
Civil Action 5:21-2123-MGL-KDW (D.S.C. Feb. 14, 2022)

Opinion

Civil Action 5:21-2123-MGL-KDW

02-14-2022

EDWARD DRUMMOND, a/k/a Edward Drummond, #367456, a/k/a Edward Terrick Drummond, #18-02454, Plaintiff, v. GREENVILLE COUNTY JAIL; STATE OF SOUTH CAROLINA; DIRECTOR ISRAL HOLLISTER; ASSISTANT DIRECTOR JOHN VANDERMOSTEN; and HANNAH DORNALDS, R.N. Defendants.


ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, AND DISMISSING PLAINTIFF'S ACTION WITHOUT PREJUDICE FOR FAILURE TO PROSECUTE

MARY GEIGER LEWIS UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

Plaintiff Edward Drummond (Drummond) filed this 42 U.S.C. 1983 pro se lawsuit against the above-named defendants. The matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of the United States Magistrate Judge suggesting this action be dismissed pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to comply with a Court order. The Report was made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 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 the Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report 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. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

The Magistrate Judge filed the Report on January 10, 2022, but Drummond failed file any objections. “[I]n 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.'” Diamond v. Colonial Life & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed.R.Civ.P. 72 advisory committee's note). Moreover, a failure to object waives appellate review. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985).

After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case pursuant to the standard set forth above, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the judgment of the Court this action is DISMISSED WITHOUT PREJUDICE pursuant to Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 41(b) for failure to comply with a Court order.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

*****

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL

The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this Order within thirty days from the date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.


Summaries of

Drummond v. Jail

United States District Court, D. South Carolina
Feb 14, 2022
Civil Action 5:21-2123-MGL-KDW (D.S.C. Feb. 14, 2022)
Case details for

Drummond v. Jail

Case Details

Full title:EDWARD DRUMMOND, a/k/a Edward Drummond, #367456, a/k/a Edward Terrick…

Court:United States District Court, D. South Carolina

Date published: Feb 14, 2022

Citations

Civil Action 5:21-2123-MGL-KDW (D.S.C. Feb. 14, 2022)