From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Lee v. Medical Facility at Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Greenville Division
Feb 21, 2006
C/A No. 8:06-173-GRA-BHH (D.S.C. Feb. 21, 2006)

Opinion

C/A No. 8:06-173-GRA-BHH.

February 21, 2006


ORDER (Written Opinion)


This matter is before the Court for a review of the magistrate's Report and Recommendation made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 73.02(B)(2)(d), D.S.C., and filed January 26, 2006. Plaintiff brought this suit pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The magistrate recommends dismissing Plaintiff's complaint without prejudice and without issuance and service of process.

Plaintiff is proceeding pro se. This Court is required to construe pro se pleadings liberally. Such pleadings are held to a less stringent standard than those drafted by attorneys. Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978). This Court is charged with liberally construing a pleading filed by a pro se litigant to allow for the development of a potentially meritorious claim. Haines v. Kerner, 404 U.S. 519, 520 (1972).

The magistrate makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation has no presumptive weight, and responsibility for making a final determination remains with this Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). This Court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which specific objection is made, and this Court may "accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). This Court may also "receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate with instructions." Id. In the absence of specific objections to the Report and Recommendation, this Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198 (4th. Cir. 1983). Plaintiff has not objected to the Report and Recommendation.

Instead Plaintiff filed a motion to Amend his Complaint dated February 14, 2006. Pursuant to Rule 15(a), Fed.R.Civ.Pro., this Court will not grant Plaintiff's motion to Amend. Plaintiff will have to file another claim asserting the proper persons as Defendants.

After a review of the magistrate's Report and Recommendation, this Court finds that the report is based upon the proper law. Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation is accepted and adopted in its entirety.

IT IS THEREFORE ORDERED that Plaintiff's complaint be DISMISSED without prejudice and without issuance and service of process.

IT IS SO ORDERED.


Summaries of

Lee v. Medical Facility at Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center

United States District Court, D. South Carolina, Greenville Division
Feb 21, 2006
C/A No. 8:06-173-GRA-BHH (D.S.C. Feb. 21, 2006)
Case details for

Lee v. Medical Facility at Alvin S. Glenn Detention Center

Case Details

Full title:Tobias Chano Lee, #87066 Plaintiff, v. Medical Facility at Alvin S. Glenn…

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

Date published: Feb 21, 2006

Citations

C/A No. 8:06-173-GRA-BHH (D.S.C. Feb. 21, 2006)