From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Young v. Dow

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Columbia Division
Mar 6, 2009
C.A. No.: 3:08-1702-RBH (D.S.C. Mar. 6, 2009)

Summary

granting in part and denying in part defendants' motion to dismiss and/or motion for summary judgment and staying the case as to plaintiff's remaining 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims for false arrest and coerced interrogation

Summary of this case from Tarpein v. S.C. Dep't of Nat. Res.

Opinion

C.A. No.: 3:08-1702-RBH.

March 6, 2009


ORDER


This matter is before the court for review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Joseph R. McCrorey, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local 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 this court. See Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). The court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which specific objection is made, and the court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommen-dation of the Magistrate Judge or recommit the matter with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

No objections were filed to the Report and Recommendation. In the absence of objections to the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, this court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983).

After a thorough review of the Report and Recommendation and the record in this case, the court adopts Magistrate Judge McCrorey's Report and Recommendation and incorporates it herein. It is therefore

ORDERED that the defendants' motion to dismiss and/or summary judgment [docket #26] is hereby GRANTED in part and DENIED in part. Plaintiff's § 1983 claims against CCPD are DISMISSED. Plaintiff's claim for alienation of affection are DISMISSED. Defendants are granted summary judgment as to plaintiff's property claims. Defendants' motion to dismiss this action as a sanction for plaintiff's failure to cooperate with discovery is DENIED, and this action is STAYED as to plaintiff's remaining § 1983 claims (false arrest and coerced interrogation) during the pendency of plaintiff's criminal (stalking, murder and attempted murder) proceedings until conviction or dismissal by the State trial court. The parties are directed to notify the Court upon disposition of the State criminal matter. Defendants' motions to compel (docket #'s 20 and 22) are DENIED with the right of defendants to refile these motions, if necessary, after the stay is lifted.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Young v. Dow

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Columbia Division
Mar 6, 2009
C.A. No.: 3:08-1702-RBH (D.S.C. Mar. 6, 2009)

granting in part and denying in part defendants' motion to dismiss and/or motion for summary judgment and staying the case as to plaintiff's remaining 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims for false arrest and coerced interrogation

Summary of this case from Tarpein v. S.C. Dep't of Nat. Res.

granting in part and denying in part defendants' motion to dismiss and/or motion for summary judgment and staying the case as to plaintiff's remaining 42 U.S.C. § 1983 claims for false arrest and coerced interrogation

Summary of this case from Tarpein v. S.C. Dep't of Nat. Res.
Case details for

Young v. Dow

Case Details

Full title:Michael J. Young, Jr., #35851, Plaintiff, v. Nole S. Dow, Investigator…

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

Date published: Mar 6, 2009

Citations

C.A. No.: 3:08-1702-RBH (D.S.C. Mar. 6, 2009)

Citing Cases

Tarpein v. S.C. Dep't of Nat. Res.

The court has addressed Defendants' arguments as found in their motion to dismiss above. See, e.g., Young v.…

Tarpein v. S.C. Dep't of Nat. Res.

The court has addressed Defendants' arguments as found in their motion to dismiss above. See, e.g., Young v.…