From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Evans v. S.L.R. Det. Ctr.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA FLORENCE DIVISION
Dec 5, 2017
C.A. No. 4:17-2731-HMH-TER (D.S.C. Dec. 5, 2017)

Opinion

C.A. No. 4:17-2731-HMH-TER

12-05-2017

Gene David Evans, Jr., #23042, Plaintiff, v. S.L.R. Detention Center, Sumter County, Sumter County Sheriff's Department, S.H.P./Southern Health Partners, Miss Abraham, Sgt. Sweat, Corr. Ofc. Glisson, Defendants.


OPINION & ORDER

This matter is before the court for review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Thomas E. Rogers, III, made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) 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 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 recommendation of the magistrate judge or recommit the matter with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) (2006).

The Plaintiff filed no objections to the Report and Recommendation. In the absence of objections to the magistrate judge's Report and Recommendation, 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). The court 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).

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

ORDERED that the complaint is partially dismissed without prejudice. Plaintiff's claims regarding solitary confinement and deliberate indifference to medical care will proceed. Defendants S.L.R. Detention Center, Sumter County, Sumter County Sheriff's Department, and S.H.P./Southern Health Partners are summarily dismissed without issuance and service of process.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Henry M. Herlong, Jr.

Senior United States District Judge Greenville, South Carolina
December 5, 2017

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL

The Plaintiff is hereby notified that he has the right to appeal this order within thirty (30) days from the date hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.


Summaries of

Evans v. S.L.R. Det. Ctr.

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA FLORENCE DIVISION
Dec 5, 2017
C.A. No. 4:17-2731-HMH-TER (D.S.C. Dec. 5, 2017)
Case details for

Evans v. S.L.R. Det. Ctr.

Case Details

Full title:Gene David Evans, Jr., #23042, Plaintiff, v. S.L.R. Detention Center…

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

Date published: Dec 5, 2017

Citations

C.A. No. 4:17-2731-HMH-TER (D.S.C. Dec. 5, 2017)

Citing Cases

Manning v. DVA Well Path Correct Care Sols.

Absent such allegations, to the extent his complaint raises a deliberate indifference claim against Defendant…