Bennett v. Cannon et al

Filing 87

ORDER ADOPTING REPORT AND RECOMMENDATIONS 82 of Magistrate Judge Robert S Carr and dismissing this case WITH PREJUDICE for failure to prosecute. Signed by Honorable G Ross Anderson, Jr on 10/29/2008. (ssan, )

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA CHARLESTON DIVISION

Edward B Bennett,

) ) Plaintiff, ) ) v. ) Sheriff Al J Cannon, Jr; ) Dr NFN Peinning; ) Prison Health Services; ) Aramark Food Services; ) Nurses on Duty; ) Officers on Duty; and ) R Markley Dennis, ) ) Defendant. ) ______________________________________ )

C/A No.: 2:08-cv-00077-GRA ORDER (Written Opinion)

This matter comes before the Court to review the magistrate's Report and Recommendation pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1)(B) and Local Rule 73.02(B)(2)(d), D.S.C., filed on September 25, 2008. Plaintiff originally filed a complaint pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. The magistrate now recommends that this Court dismiss the petitioner's claims with prejudice for a failure to prosecute. For the reasons stated herein, this Court adopts the magistrate's recommendation. Plaintiff brings this claim pro se. This Court is required to construe pro se pleadings liberally. Such pleadings are held to a less stringent standard than those drafted by attorneys. See Gordon v. Leeke, 574 F.2d 1147, 1151 (4th Cir. 1978). This Court is charged with liberally construing a pleading filed by a pro se litigant to allow for the development of a potentially meritorious claim. See Boag v. MacDougall,

454 U.S. 364, 365 (1982). The magistrate makes only a recommendation to this Court. The

recommendation has no presumptive weight, and responsibility for making a final determination remains with this Court. Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270-71 (1976). This Court is charged with making a de novo determination of those portions of the Report and Recommendation to which specific objection is made, and this Court may "accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or recommendations made by the magistrate." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1). This Court may also "receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate with instructions." Id. In the absence of specific objections to the Report and Recommendation, this Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198 (4th. Cir. 1983). Plaintiff did not file any objections. After a review of the magistrate's Report and Recommendation, applicable case law, and the record, this Court finds that the magistrate applied sound legal principles to the facts of this case. Recommendation in its entirety. IT IS THEREFORE SO ORDERED THAT the petitioner's claims be DISMISSED with prejudice for lack of prosecution. Therefore, this Court adopts the Report and

IT IS SO ORDERED.

Anderson, South Carolina October 29, 2008

NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL Pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, Plaintiff has the right to appeal this Order within thirty (30) days from the date of its entry. Failure to meet this deadline, as modified by Rule 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure, will waive the right to appeal.