McCall v. Bodiford et al

Filing 143

ORDER RULING ON REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION: The Court hereby ACCEPTS the Report, ECF No. 137 . For the reasons stated in the Report, the Motion for Summary Judgment, ECF No. 113 , is GRANTED and Defendant McAlhaney is hereby DISMISSED. Additionally, as stated in the Report, Defendant Drawdy is DISMISSED based on the Plaintiff's failure to affect service.IT IS SO ORDERED. Signed by Chief Judge Terry L Wooten on 09/08/2017. (dsto, )

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
Terry Edward McCall,

)
)
Plaintiff,
)
)
vs.
)
)
David E. McAlhaney and
)
Sarah Drawdy,
)
)
Defendants.
)
_____________________________________________ )

C/A No.: 2:15-cv-01011-TLW-MGB

ORDER

Plaintiff Terry Edward McCall, a state prisoner proceeding pro se and in forma pauperis,
filed this action on March 2, 2015, pursuant to 42 U.S.C. § 1983. ECF No. 1. This matter now
comes before this Court for review of the Report and Recommendation (“the Report”) filed on
July 24, 2017, by United States Magistrate Judge Mary Gordon Baker, ECF No. 137, to whom this
case was assigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1) and Local Civil Rule 73.02(B)(2)(e), (D.S.C.).
In the Report, the Magistrate Judge recommends that the Court grant Defendant’s Motion for
Summary Judgment. ECF No. 137. The deadline to file objections was August 30, 2017.
However, Plaintiff failed to file objections to the Report. This matter is now ripe for disposition.
The Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the Report to
which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the
recommendations contained therein. 28 U.S.C. § 636. However, in the absence of objections to
the Report, the Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the Magistrate Judge’s
recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 200 (4th Cir. 1983). In such a case, “a
district court need not conduct a 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.’” Diamond v.

Colonial Life & Accident Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315 (4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72
advisory committee’s note). However, the Court did conduct a de novo review and concludes the
Report should be accepted.
In light of this standard, the Court has carefully reviewed the Report, the relevant filings,
and the applicable law. After careful consideration, the Court accepts the detailed legal analysis
by the Magistrate Judge and notes that Plaintiff has not filed objections. Accordingly, the Court
hereby ACCEPTS the Report, ECF No. 137. For the reasons stated in the Report, the Motion for
Summary Judgment, ECF No. 113, is GRANTED and Defendant McAlhaney is hereby
DISMISSED. Additionally, as stated in the Report, Defendant Drawdy is DISMISSED based on
the Plaintiff’s failure to affect service.
IT IS SO ORDERED.

s/Terry L. Wooten____________
Chief United States District Judge
September 8, 2017
Columbia, South Carolina