From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Greene v. Stonebreaker

United States District Court, D. South Carolina
Aug 6, 2007
C.A. No. 9:06-3392-PMD (D.S.C. Aug. 6, 2007)

Summary

noting that a person in South Carolina appears to have adequate post-deprivation remedies for personal property loss

Summary of this case from Law v. Dorsey

Opinion

C.A. No. 9:06-3392-PMD.

August 6, 2007


ORDER


This matter is before the court upon the magistrate judge's recommendation that defendant's motion for summary judgment be granted. The record includes the report and recommendation of the United States Magistrate Judge made in accordance with this Court's Order of Reference and 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B). Because plaintiff is pro se, this matter was referred to the magistrate judge.

Pursuant to the provisions of Title 28 United States Code, § 636(b)(1)(B), and Local Rule 73.02(B)(2)(d), D.S.C., the magistrate judge is authorized to review all pretrial matters and submit findings and recommendations to this Court.

This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the magistrate judge's report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). No objections have been filed to the magistrate judge's report.

A review of the record indicates that the magistrate judge's report accurately summarizes this case and the applicable law. For the reasons articulated by the magistrate judge, it is herewith

ORDERED that the defendant's motion for summary judgment is GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED. IT IS FURTHER ORDERED, that the magistrate judge's report and recommendation is adopted as the order of this Court.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

NOTICE OF APPEAL

Plaintiff is hereby notified that he has the right to appeal this Order within thirty (30) days from the date hereof pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.


Summaries of

Greene v. Stonebreaker

United States District Court, D. South Carolina
Aug 6, 2007
C.A. No. 9:06-3392-PMD (D.S.C. Aug. 6, 2007)

noting that a person in South Carolina appears to have adequate post-deprivation remedies for personal property loss

Summary of this case from Law v. Dorsey

noting that a person in South Carolina appears to have adequate post-deprivation remedies for personal property loss

Summary of this case from Tyler v. Jacobsen

noting that a person in South Carolina appears to have adequate post-deprivation remedies for personal property loss

Summary of this case from Hunt v. Columbia Reg'l Correct Care

noting that a person in South Carolina appears to have adequate postdeprivation remedies for personal property loss

Summary of this case from Lancaster v. Horton

noting that a person in South Carolina appears to have adequate postdeprivation remedies for personal property loss

Summary of this case from Garner v. Enzor
Case details for

Greene v. Stonebreaker

Case Details

Full title:Omekias Greene, #192673, Plaintiff, v. D. Stonebreaker, Defendant

Court:United States District Court, D. South Carolina

Date published: Aug 6, 2007

Citations

C.A. No. 9:06-3392-PMD (D.S.C. Aug. 6, 2007)

Citing Cases

Tyler v. Jacobsen

Thus, even if Defendant intentionally took Plaintiff's property, Plaintiff has remedies under South Carolina…

Smith v. Carter

at a Defendant intentionally took his personal properly, "an intentional deprivation of property by a state…