Jamison v. Bamberg et al
Filing
39
ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS adopting 23 Report and Recommendations, dismissing this case without prejudice as to Defendants Sgt Fisk, Ms Jackson, Ms Lee, Lt Murdock, Ms L Brown and Lt Burton.. Signed by Honorable R Bryan Harwell on 3/28/2012. (jpet, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
ROCK HILL DIVISION
Cecil Fitzgerald Jamison,
Plaintiff,
C.A. No.: 0:11-cv-02245-RBH-PJG
vs.
Dir. Willie Bamberg; Asst. Dir. Dozier;
Chief James; Lt. Burton; Capt. Govan;
Capt. Ryant; Lt. Jarrette; Sgt. Fisk; Ms.
Sebasco; D/O Ms. J. Williams; D/O Ms.
Lee; Sgt. Woods; Lt. Murdock; Capt.
McKutchen; D/O N. Johnson; Nurse
Webber; Nurse Kroger; D/O Livingston;
Corp. Rawls; John D. Appleton, President
ABL Management; Vincent Rose, Director
of Operations; John Doe, CEO ABL
Management; Ms. Kinard, ABL Kitchen
Mgr.; Ms. Jackson; Ms. Davis; Ms. Jane
Doe, Kitchen Supervisor ABL; Ms. L
Brown; all in their individual and official
capacities;
Defendants.
ORDER
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
Plaintiff, a former county detention center inmate proceeding pro se, filed this suit
pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. This matter is before the court for review of the Report and
Recommendation of United States Magistrate Judge Paige J. Gossett, made in accordance with
28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local 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
1
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).
Neither party has filed objections to the Report and Recommendation. In the absence
of objections to the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, 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 reviews only for clear error in the absence of an
objection. See Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310 (4th Cir. 2005)
stating that “in the absence of a timely filed objection, a district court need not conduct de novo
review, but instead must 'only satisfy itself that there is no clear error on the face of the record
in order to accept the recommendation.'” (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee's
note).
After a thorough review of the record in this case, the Court finds no clear error.
Accordingly, the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge is adopted and
incorporated by reference. Therefore, it is
ORDERED that the Complaint in this case is dismissed without prejudice as to
Defendants Lt. Burton, Sgt. Fisk, DO Lt. Murdock, Ms. Jackson, Ms. L. Brown, and DO Ms.
Lee.
2
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/R. Bryan Harwell
R. Bryan Harwell
United States District Judge
Florence, South Carolina
March 28, 2012
3
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?