From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Brown v. Holbrook

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION
Sep 8, 2017
Civil Action No. 3:16-02898-MGL-BM (D.S.C. Sep. 8, 2017)

Opinion

Civil Action No. 3:16-02898-MGL-BM

09-08-2017

VERNON SAMUEL BROWN, Plaintiff, v. SKIP HOLBROOK and CORPORAL ERSKINE MOODY, Defendants.


ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION AND DENYING WITHOUT PREJUDICE PLAINTIFF'S MOTION FOR SUMMARY JUDGMENT

This action arises under 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Plaintiff is proceeding pro se. The matter is before the Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of the United States Magistrate Judge suggesting Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment, ECF No. 70, be denied without prejudice. The Report was made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Civil 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 the Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report to which specific objection is made, and the Court may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendation of the Magistrate Judge or recommit the matter with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).

The Magistrate Judge filed the Report on July 17, 2017, ECF No. 84, but Plaintiff failed to file any objections to the Report. "[I]n 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). Moreover, a failure to object waives appellate review. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985).

After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case pursuant to the standard set forth above, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the judgment of the Court Plaintiff's motion for summary judgment is DENIED WITHOUT PREJUDICE. If discovery in this case has now been completed, Plaintiff may file a new motion for summary judgment, if he so desires, together with whatever evidence he has to support his claims.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Signed this 8th day of September 2017 in Columbia, South Carolina.

s/ Mary Geiger Lewis

MARY GEIGER LEWIS

UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE

*****

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL

The parties are hereby notified of the right to appeal this Order within thirty days from the date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.


Summaries of

Brown v. Holbrook

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION
Sep 8, 2017
Civil Action No. 3:16-02898-MGL-BM (D.S.C. Sep. 8, 2017)
Case details for

Brown v. Holbrook

Case Details

Full title:VERNON SAMUEL BROWN, Plaintiff, v. SKIP HOLBROOK and CORPORAL ERSKINE…

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

Date published: Sep 8, 2017

Citations

Civil Action No. 3:16-02898-MGL-BM (D.S.C. Sep. 8, 2017)