Murray v. Chester SC, City of et al

Filing 46

ORDER ADOPTING THE REPORT AND RECOMMENDATION, granting defendants' second motion to dismiss, for 44 Report and Recommendations. Signed by Honorable Terry L Wooten on February 2, 2012. (kbos)

Download PDF
IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF SOUTH CAROLINA COLUMBIA DIVISION Jacob F. Murray, ) ) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) ) City of Chester, S.C.; Chester Police Dept.; ) and Sgt. Gadson, ) ) Defendants. ) ____________________________________) C.A. No. 3:10-1536-TLW-JRM ORDER This matter is now before the undersigned for review of the Report and Recommendation (“the Report”) filed by United States Magistrate Judge Joseph R. McCrorey, to whom this case had previously been assigned pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 636(b) and Local Rule 73.02(B)(2) (D.S.C.). In his Report, Magistrate Judge McCrorey recommends that Defendants’ second motion to dismiss (Doc. # 40) be granted. No objections to the Report have been filed. This Court is charged with conducting a de novo review of any portion of the Magistrate Judge’s Report to which a specific objection is registered, and may accept, reject, or modify, in whole or in part, the recommendations contained in that report. 28 U.S.C. § 636. No objections have been filed to the Report. In the absence of objections to the Report and Recommendation of the Magistrate Judge, this Court is not required to give any explanation for adopting the recommendation. See Camby v. Davis, 718 F.2d 198, 199 (4th Cir. 1983). 1 A review of the record indicates that the Report accurately summarizes this case and the applicable law. For the reasons articulated by the Magistrate Judge, it is hereby ORDERED that the Magistrate Judge’s Report is ACCEPTED (Doc. # 44), and Defendants’ second motion to dismiss (Doc. # 40) is GRANTED. IT IS SO ORDERED. s/ Terry L. Wooten TERRY L. WOOTEN UNITED STATES DISTRICT JUDGE February 2, 2012 Florence, South Carolina 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?