From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Washington v. Hilton Hotels Corp.

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Charleston Division
Mar 17, 2008
Civil Action No.: 2:07-2694-CWH (D.S.C. Mar. 17, 2008)

Opinion

Civil Action No.: 2:07-2694-CWH.

March 17, 2008


ORDER


On April 30, 2007, the plaintiff, Lori Washington, commenced this action, pursuant to Title VII of the Civil Rights Act of 1964, as amended, 42 U.S.C. 2000e, et seq., in the Charleston County Court of Common Pleas. On August 2, 2007, the defendant Hampton Inn timely removed the action to this Court on the grounds of both federal question and diversity jurisdiction. On August 29, 2007, the defendant Hampton Inn moved to dismiss the plaintiff's second, third, and fourth causes of action for failure to state a claim upon which relief may be granted, pursuant to the Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 12(b)(6). On January 14, 2008, Magistrate Judge George C. Kosko ("Magistrate Judge Kosko") issued a report analyzing the issues and recommending that Hampton Inn's motion for partial dismissal should be granted.

This Court is charged with making a de novo determination of any portions of the magistrate judge's recommendation to which specific objection is made. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b). The Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in party, the report and recommendation, or recommit the matter with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). To this date, the plaintiff has failed to make a timely objection to the report and recommendation. Id. In the absence of objections to the report and recommendation, a district court judge 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 (4th Cir. 2005).

A review of the record indicates that the report and recommendation accurately summarizes this case and the applicable law. The Court declines to award Hampton Inn reasonable costs and attorney's fees expended in preparing and submitting the motion for partial dismissal. For the reasons articulated by Magistrate Judge Kosko, the Court grants Hampton Inn's motion for partial dismissal.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Washington v. Hilton Hotels Corp.

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Charleston Division
Mar 17, 2008
Civil Action No.: 2:07-2694-CWH (D.S.C. Mar. 17, 2008)
Case details for

Washington v. Hilton Hotels Corp.

Case Details

Full title:Lori Washington, Plaintiff, v. Hilton Hotels Corp. d/b/a Hampton Inn, Doe…

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

Date published: Mar 17, 2008

Citations

Civil Action No.: 2:07-2694-CWH (D.S.C. Mar. 17, 2008)

Citing Cases

Trahey v. Grand Strand Reg'l Med. Ctr.

Courts, applying Section 42-1-540, have held that claims for negligent supervision specifically are covered…

Pomerantz v. Coastal Carolina Univ.

Dickert v. Metro. Life Ins. Co., 311 S.C. 218, 428 S.E.2d 700 (S.C. 1993); Washington v. Hilton Hotels…