From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Reavis v. Rader

United States District Court, S.D. Mississippi, Southern Division
May 25, 2011
Civil Action No. 1:10cv310-LG-RHW (S.D. Miss. May. 25, 2011)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 1:10cv310-LG-RHW.

May 25, 2011


ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS


BEFORE THE COURT is the Report and Recommendations [17] entered by United States Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker. Judge Walker recommends that the Motion to Dismiss [9] filed by Steven Rader and Jim Hood be granted, and that the Motion for Summary Judgment [13] filed by Rader and Hood and the Motion to Withdraw Petition [16] filed by Warren C. Reavis, III, are moot. Judge Walker further recommends that the petition for writ of habeas corpus filed by Reavis be dismissed.

Reavis was advised that he must file any objections to Judge Walker's recommendations within fourteen days of being served with a copy of the Report and Recommendations. The Court record reveals that Reavis has not filed an objection to the Report and Recommendations.

Where no party has objected to the Magistrate Judge's proposed findings of fact and recommendation, the Court need not conduct a de novo review of it. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) ("A judge of the court shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specified proposed findings and recommendations to which objection is made."). In such cases, the Court need only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record. Douglass v. United Serv. Auto Ass'n, 79 F.3d 1415, 1420 (5th Cir. 1996).

Having conducted the required review, the Court finds that Judge Walker's Report and Recommendations is neither clearly erroneous nor contrary to law. Therefore, the Court finds that the Report and Recommendations entered by United States Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker should be adopted as the opinion of this Court.

IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Report and Recommendations [17] entered by United States Magistrate Judge Robert H. Walker, be, and the same hereby is, ADOPTED as the finding of this Court.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED AND ADJUDGED that the Motion to Dismiss [9] filed by Steven Rader and Jim Hood is GRANTED, while the Motion for Summary Judgment [13] filed by Rader and Hood and the Motion to Withdraw Petition [16] filed by Warren C. Reavis, III, are MOOT. The petition for writ of habeas corpus filed by Reavis is DISMISSED. SO ORDERED AND ADJUDGED


Summaries of

Reavis v. Rader

United States District Court, S.D. Mississippi, Southern Division
May 25, 2011
Civil Action No. 1:10cv310-LG-RHW (S.D. Miss. May. 25, 2011)
Case details for

Reavis v. Rader

Case Details

Full title:WARREN C. REAVIS, III PETITIONER v. STEVEN RADER and JIM HOOD RESPONDENTS

Court:United States District Court, S.D. Mississippi, Southern Division

Date published: May 25, 2011

Citations

Civil Action No. 1:10cv310-LG-RHW (S.D. Miss. May. 25, 2011)