Walker v. S.C. Reg'l Hous. Dev. Corp. No. 1

Full title: Alquetta Walker, Plaintiff, v. South Carolina Regional Housing Development…

Court: UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA ANDERSON/GREENWOOD DIVISION

Date published: Jan 3, 2017

C.A. No. 8:16-3070-HMH (D.S.C. Jan. 3, 2017)

Opinion

C.A. No. 8:16-3070-HMH

01-03-2017

Alquetta Walker, Plaintiff, v. South Carolina Regional Housing Development Corporation No. 1, d/b/a South Carolina Regional Housing Authority No. 1; Brian Griswell, in his official capacity as Executive Director of South Carolina Regional Housing Development Corporation No., Defendants.

Henry M. Herlong, Jr. Senior United States District Judge

OPINION & ORDER

This matter is before the court for review of the Report and Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Jacquelyn D. Austin, 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 parties 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 Austin's Report and Recommendation and incorporates it herein. It is therefore

ORDERED that Plaintiff's motion for preliminary injunction, docket number 6, is granted without prejudice to Defendants' rights to pursue additional eviction proceedings if new grounds arise subsequent to the filing of this action.

IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Henry M. Herlong, Jr.

Senior United States District Judge Greenville, South Carolina
January 3, 2017