From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Milledge v. Greenville Cnty. Sheriffs Office

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION
Dec 10, 2013
Civil Action No. 6:13-2941-TMC (D.S.C. Dec. 10, 2013)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 6:13-2941-TMC

12-10-2013

Michael Alexander Milledge, #340057, Plaintiff, v. Greenville County Sheriffs Office; Sylvia Paris Harrison, Defendants.


ORDER

Plaintiff, a state prisoner proceeding pro se, brought this action seeking the return of his personal property. Because Plaintiff alleges a deprivation by a state employee, the court reviews his complaint under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. In accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 73.02, D.S.C., this matter was referred to a magistrate judge for pretrial handling. Before the court is the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation ("Report"), recommending that Plaintiff's complaint be dismissed without prejudice for failure to state a claim. Plaintiff was advised of his right to file objections to the Report. (ECF No. 10 at 7). However, Plaintiff filed no objections to the Report, and the time to do so has now run.

The Report has no presumptive weight and the responsibility to make a final determination in this matter remains with this court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). In the absence of objections, this court is not required to provide an explanation for adopting the Report. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). Rather, "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." 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).

After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case, the court adopts the magistrate judge's Report (ECF No. 10) and incorporates it herein. It is therefore ORDERED that Plaintiff's complaint is DISMISSED without prejudice.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Timothy M. Cain

United States District Court Judge
December 10, 2013
Anderson, South Carolina

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL

The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this order pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.


Summaries of

Milledge v. Greenville Cnty. Sheriffs Office

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION
Dec 10, 2013
Civil Action No. 6:13-2941-TMC (D.S.C. Dec. 10, 2013)
Case details for

Milledge v. Greenville Cnty. Sheriffs Office

Case Details

Full title:Michael Alexander Milledge, #340057, Plaintiff, v. Greenville County…

Court:UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA GREENVILLE DIVISION

Date published: Dec 10, 2013

Citations

Civil Action No. 6:13-2941-TMC (D.S.C. Dec. 10, 2013)

Citing Cases

City of Darlington v. Thompson et al

It is evident, therefore, that the "sale" of such literature by defendants was merely collateral to the main…