Booker v. South Carolina Department of Corrections et al
Filing
86
ORDER adopting 83 Report and Recommendation of Magistrate Judge Mary Gordon Baker; granting 65 Motion to Dismiss. It is the judgment of this Court Defendants Willie Eagleton and Charles West's Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint against them is GRANTED. Signed by Honorable Mary Geiger Lewis on 9/30/2016.(ssam, )
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT
FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA
CHARLESTON DIVISION
PATRICK L. BOOKER
Plaintiff,
§
§
§
vs.
§ CIVIL ACTION NO.2:15-02986-MGL-MGB
§
PATRICIA GRAHAM, ANDERSON BLUE, §
ERIC BROWN, FREDERICK FORD, ANNIE §
SELLERS, EUGENE HOWARD, WILLIE
§
EAGLETON, CHARLES WEST, LEON
§
LOTT, and JOHN DOE,
§
Defendants.
§
ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION
AND GRANTING DEFENDANTS WILLIE EAGLETON AND CHARLES WEST’S
MOTION TO DISMISS THE SECOND AMENDED COMPLAINT AGAINST THEM
This case was filed as a 42 U.S.C. § 1983 action. The matter is before the Court for review
of the Report and Recommendation (Report) of the United States Magistrate Judge suggesting
Defendants Willie Eagleton and Charles West’s Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended Complaint
against them be granted. The Report was made in accordance with 28 U.S.C. § 636 and Local Civil
Rule 73.02 for the District of South Carolina.
The Magistrate Judge makes only a recommendation to this Court. The recommendation has
no presumptive weight. The responsibility to make a final determination remains with the Court.
Mathews v. Weber, 423 U.S. 261, 270 (1976). The Court is charged with making a de novo
determination of those portions of the Report 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 with instructions. 28 U.S.C. § 636(b)(1).
The Magistrate Judge filed the Report on August 31, 2016, but Plaintiff failed to file any
objections. “[I]n the absence of a timely filed objection, 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 & Acc. Ins. Co., 416 F.3d 310, 315
(4th Cir. 2005) (quoting Fed. R. Civ. P. 72 advisory committee’s note). Moreover, a failure to
object waives appellate review. Wright v. Collins, 766 F.2d 841, 845-46 (4th Cir. 1985).
After a thorough review of the Report and the record in this case employing the standard set
forth above, the Court adopts the Report and incorporates it herein. Therefore, it is the judgment of
this Court Defendants Willie Eagleton and Charles West’s Motion to Dismiss the Second Amended
Complaint against them is GRANTED.
IT IS SO ORDERED.
Signed this 30th day of September, 2016, in Columbia, South Carolina.
s/ Mary G. Lewis
MARY G. LEWIS
UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE
*****
NOTICE OF RIGHT TO APPEAL
Plaintiff is hereby notified of the right to appeal this Order within thirty days from the date
hereof, pursuant to Rules 3 and 4 of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure.
2
Disclaimer: Justia Dockets & Filings provides public litigation records from the federal appellate and district courts. These filings and docket sheets should not be considered findings of fact or liability, nor do they necessarily reflect the view of Justia.
Why Is My Information Online?