Smalley v. SC Electric Cooperatives Aiken County Electric

Filing 26

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION adopting 13 Report and Recommendation, denying 23 Motion to Appoint Counsel. Signed by Honorable Joseph F. Anderson, Jr. on 02/16/2016. (bshr, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
COLUMBIA DIVISION
Terry Mikell Smalley,

C/A No. 1:15-cv-4033-JFA

Plaintiff,
v.
ORDER
S.C. Electric Cooperatives/Aiken County
Electric,
Defendant.

Terry Mikell Smalley (“Smalley”) filed this pro se action while confined at Ridgeland
Correctional Institution in Ridgeland, South Carolina. Smalley alleges that the Defendant “failed
and refused to take proper steps to return capital credits for former members.” (ECF No. 1). He
further alleges “breach of fiduciary duty and unfair trade practices and 4th amendment
violations.” Id.
The Magistrate Judge assigned to this action 1 prepared a thorough Report and
Recommendation (“Report”) and opines that this court should dismiss the Complaint in this case
without prejudice. (ECF No. 13). The Report sets forth in detail the relevant facts and standards
of law on this matter, and this court incorporates those facts and standards without a recitation.
Smalley was advised of his right to object to the Report, which was entered on the docket
on September 9, 2015. On November 23, 2015, Smalley made a motion for extension of time to

1

The Magistrate Judge’s review is made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Civil
Rule 73.02(B)(2)(g) (D.S.C.). The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this court. The
recommendation has no presumptive weight, and the responsibility to make a final determination
remains with the court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261 (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 to the Magistrate Judge with instructions. See 28 U.S.C. §
636(b)(1).

file objections to the Report. (ECF No. 17). On February 1, 2016, the Court granted Smalley’s
motion and gave him until March 2, 2016 to file specific objections to the Report. (ECF No. 20).
On February 12, 2016, Smalley made a motion requesting the Court to appoint counsel for him
in this case (ECF No. 23), and also filed a response to the Report that failed to make any specific
objections whatsoever. (ECF No. 24). In the absence of specific objections to the Report of the
Magistrate Judge, this Court is not required to give an explanation for adopting the
recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983).
After carefully reviewing the applicable laws, the record in this case, as well as the
Report, this court finds the Magistrate Judge’s recommendation fairly and accurately summarizes
the facts and applies the correct principles of law. Accordingly, the court adopts the Report and
Recommendation. In addition, Smalley’s motion requesting this Court to appoint counsel for
him in this case is denied. 2

IT IS SO ORDERED.

February 16, 2016
Columbia, South Carolina

Joseph F. Anderson, Jr.
United States District Judge

2

See Geter v. Taharra, 429 Fed. Appx. 265, 266 (4th Cir. 2011) (holding that “there is no right to
appointment of counsel in a civil case”).
2