From Casetext: Smarter Legal Research

Thomasson v. Tapper

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Feb 22, 2012
C/A No. 4:11-686 DCN (D.S.C. Feb. 22, 2012)

Opinion

C/A No. 4:11-686 DCN

02-22-2012

SYLVESTER J. THOMASSON, Plaintiff, v. JOAN TAPPER, P.A.; DR. LORENZO GUEVARA, Defendants.


ORDER

The above referenced case is before this court upon the magistrate judge's recommendation that defendants' motion for summary judgment be granted in its entirety and the case be dismissed, and that any outstanding motions be deemed moot.

This court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the magistrate judge's report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that report. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). However, absent prompt objection by a dissatisfied party, it appears that Congress did not intend for the district court to review the factual and legal conclusions of the magistrate judge. Thomas v Arn, 474 U.S. 140 (1985). Additionally, any party who fails to file timely, written objections to the magistrate judge's report pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) waives the right to raise those objections at the appellate court level. United States v. Schronce, 727 F.2d 91 (4th Cir. 1984), cert. denied, 467 U.S. 1208 (1984). No objections have been filed to the magistrate judge's report and recommendation.

In Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841 (4th Cir. 1985), the court held "that a pro se litigant must receive fair notification of the consequences of failure to object to a magistrate judge's report before such a procedural default will result in waiver of the right to appeal. The notice must be 'sufficiently understandable to one in appellant's circumstances fairly to appraise him of what is required.'" Id. at 846. Plaintiff was advised in a clear manner that his objections had to be filed within ten (10) days, and he received notice of the consequences at the appellate level of his failure to object to the magistrate judge's report.

A de novo review of the record indicates that the magistrate judge's report accurately summarizes this case and the applicable law. Accordingly, the magistrate judge's report and recommendation is AFFIRMED, defendants' motion for summary judgment is GRANTED in its entirety, and the case is DISMISSED.

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that all other outstanding motions are deemed MOOT.

AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

February 22, 2012

Charleston, South Carolina

___________________________

David C. Norton

United States District Judge

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL

The parties are hereby notified that any right to appeal this Order is governed by Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.


Summaries of

Thomasson v. Tapper

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Feb 22, 2012
C/A No. 4:11-686 DCN (D.S.C. Feb. 22, 2012)
Case details for

Thomasson v. Tapper

Case Details

Full title:SYLVESTER J. THOMASSON, Plaintiff, v. JOAN TAPPER, P.A.; DR. LORENZO…

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

Date published: Feb 22, 2012

Citations

C/A No. 4:11-686 DCN (D.S.C. Feb. 22, 2012)