Wall v. China et al

Filing 91

ORDER adopting 87 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Bruce Howe Hendricks; granting 75 Motion for Summary Judgment. The Court grants Defendant's motion for summary judgment as to all Plaintiff's federal claims, and Plaintiff's state law claims are dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1367(c)(3). Signed by Honorable Richard M Gergel on 2/6/2014. (ssam, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT

FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA

CHARLESTON DIVISION

Billy Eugene Wall, Jr.,
Plaintiff,
v.
Capt. Charles Frazer, Col/eton County
Detention Center, Officer Thomas
Richberg, Col/eton County Detention
Center, and Officer Joe Waring,
individually and in their official
capacities,
Defendant.

)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)
)

No. 2: 12-cv-618-RMG

ORDER

This matter comes before the Court on the Report and Recommendation ("R&R") of the
Magistrate Judge recommending that the Court grant Defendants' motion for summary
judgment. (Dkt. No. 87). As set forth below, the Court agrees with and adopts the R&R as the
order of the Court.
Background

Plaintiff, proceeding pro se, brings this action pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. Pursuant to
the provisions of28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2)(e) DSC, this matter was
referred to a United States Magistrate Judge for all pretrial proceedings. On March 28, 2013,
Defendants filed a motion for summary judgment. (Dkt. No. 75). Plaintiff then filed a response
in opposition to the motion, (Dkt. No. 85), and Defendants filed a reply, (Dkt. No. 86). The
Magistrate Judge then issued the present R&R recommending the Court grant the motion for
summary judgment. (Dkt. No. 87). Plaintiff failed to file timely objections to the R&R.

Legal Standard

The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation
has no presumptive weight, and the 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 R&R to which specific objection is made.
Additionally, the Court may "accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the findings or
recommendations made by the magistrate judge." 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(I). This Court may also
"receive further evidence or recommit the matter to the magistrate judge with instructions." Id.
Discussion

After review of the record and the R&R and finding no clear error, the Court agrees with
and adopts the R&R as the order of the Court. Diamond v. Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co.,
416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005). The Court agrees with the R&R that Plaintiffs claims for
false imprisonment, deliberate indifference, conditions of confinement, equitable relief, and any
state claims should be dismissed.
Conclusion

As set forth above, the Court agrees with and adopts the R&R as the order of the Court.
(Dkt. No. 87). Accordingly, the Court grants Defendant's motion for summary judgment as to
all Plaintiffs federal claims, and Plaintiffs state law claims are dismissed pursuant to 28 U.S.C.
§ 1367(c)(3).
AND IT IS SO ORDERED.

Richard Mark Ger
United States District Court Judge
February (, ,2013
Charleston, South Carolina
2