Gordon v. Newson
Filing
5
ORDER granting 2 Motion to Remand to State Court; affirming 4 Memorandum and Recommendations, and this matter is REMANDED to the North Carolina General Court of Justice, Union County. Signed by District Judge Max O. Cogburn, Jr on 9/16/2015. (Pro se litigant served by US Mail.)(eef)
UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
WESTERN DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA
CHARLOTTE DIVISION
DOCKET NO. 3:15-cv-00129-MOC-DCK
ANGELA GORDON,
Plaintiff,
Vs.
DENNIS H. NEWSON,
Defendant.
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
ORDER
THIS MATTER is before the court on review of a Memorandum and
Recommendation issued in this matter. In the Memorandum and Recommendation, the
magistrate judge advised the parties of the right to file objections within 14 days, all in
accordance with 28, United States Code, Section 636(b)(1)(c). No objections have been
filed within the time allowed.
The Federal Magistrates Act of 1979, as amended, provides that “a district court
shall make a de novo determination of those portions of the report or specific proposed
findings or recommendations to which objection is made.” 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1); Camby
v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 200 (4th Cir.1983). However, “when objections to strictly legal
issues are raised and no factual issues are challenged, de novo review of the record may be
dispensed with.” Orpiano v. Johnson, 687 F.2d 44, 47 (4th Cir. 1982). Similarly, de novo
review is not required by the statute “when a party makes general or conclusory objections
that do not direct the court to a specific error in the magistrate judge’s proposed findings
and recommendations.” Id. Moreover, the statute does not on its face require any review
at all of issues that are not the subject of an objection. Thomas v. Arn, 474 U.S. 140, 149
(1985); Camby, 718 F.2d at 200. Nonetheless, a district judge is responsible for the final
determination and outcome of the case, and accordingly the court has conducted a careful
review of the magistrate judge’s recommendation.
After such careful review, the court determines that the recommendation of the
magistrate judge is fully consistent with and supported by current law. Further, the brief
factual background and recitation of issues is supported by the applicable pleadings. Based
on such determinations, the court will fully affirm the Memorandum and Recommendation
and grant relief in accordance therewith.
ORDER
IT IS, THEREFORE, ORDERED that the Memorandum and Recommendation
(#4) is AFFIRMED, plaintiff’s Motion to Remand (#2) to State Court is GRANTED, and
this matter is REMANDED to the North Carolina General Court of Justice, Union County.
Signed: September 16, 2015
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?