Jolly v. Thompson et al

Filing 38

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION. It is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge's Report 34 is ACCEPTED. For the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, the plaintiff's motion for a preliminary injunction 26 is DENIED as moot, the defendants' motion for summary judgment 28 is GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED in its entirety. Signed by Honorable Terry L Wooten on 8/8/2011. (mcot, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
FLORENCE DIVISION
Robert Steve Jolly,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
Phillip Thompson, Joey Johnson,
)
Eddie Hill, and Tom Fox,
)
)
Defendants.
)
____________________________________)

Civil Action No.: 1:10-cv-1101-TLW-SVH

ORDER
On May 4, 2010, the plaintiff, Robert Steve Jolly (“plaintiff”), proceeding pro se, filed this
action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. (Doc. #1). The case was referred to United States Magistrate
Judge Shiva V. Hodges pursuant to the provisions of 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule
73.02(B)(2), DSC.
This matter now comes before this Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (“the
Report”) filed by the Magistrate Judge to whom this case had previously been assigned. (Doc. # 34).
On July 5, 2011, the Magistrate Judge issued the Report. In the Report, the Magistrate Judge
recommends that the plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction (Doc. # 26) be denied as moot,
that the defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. # 28) be granted, and that this case be
dismissed in its entirety. (Doc. # 34). The plaintiff filed no objections to the Report. Objections
were due on July 22, 2011.
This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the Magistrate
Judge’s Report and Recommendation to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept,
1

reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that report. 28 U.S.C. §
636. 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 has carefully reviewed the Magistrate Judge’s Report and Recommendation. It
is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report is ACCEPTED. (Doc. # 34). For the
reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, the plaintiff’s motion for a preliminary injunction (Doc.
# 26) is DENIED as moot, the defendants’ motion for summary judgment (Doc. # 28) is
GRANTED, and this case is DISMISSED in its entirety.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
s/Terry L. Wooten
United States District Judge
August 8, 2011
Florence, South Carolina

2